Just FYI: Princess Michael of Kent is a racist, and she wears racist jewelry

Members of the Royal family attend the Queen’s Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace

I don’t pay much attention to the people I consider “minor royals.” Prince Michael of Kent and Princess Michael of Kent are minor royals to me. Prince Michael is the grandson of King George V, which makes him… the Queen’s cousin? I think that’s right. Like, his father and the Queen’s father (King George VI) were brothers. Anyway, Prince Michael married this woman, Marie Christine Anna Agnes Hedwig Ida von Reibnitz, who has many European-royal and European-aristocrat family ties. She goes by Princess Michael. She’s also an a–hole.

This couple are often invited to the larger family celebrations, and they were invited to the Queen’s pre-Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace earlier this week. These photos are from the drive-up to the palace. Note Princess Michael’s brooch.

Embed from Getty Images

Lainey at LaineyGossip was one of the first to point out how f–king racist that brooch is. It’s a style of jewelry referred to as “blackamoor.” That style wasn’t just on jewelry – it made its way into artwork, home interior design, the crests of European aristocrats and more. The blackamoor style fetishizes people of color in servant or chattel-slavery roles. There’s an extremely f–ked up history to it – it glamorizes the idea that the wealthier you are, the more servants/slaves you have and isn’t that fabulous? Barf. Also keep in minds that Princess Michael wore that brooch for a lunch that included – for the very first time in the history of this royal family – a black woman who will be marrying a prince. I hope Meghan Markle told Princess Michael to shove it.

Princess Michael has a history of being a racist C-U-Next-Tuesday, by the way. Go here for some background. In 2004, she went to a restaurant in New York and she happened upon some African-Americans. She told them to “go back to the colonies.” When she was called out on that, she gave an unhinged interview where she referred to South Africans as “adorable” people, and claimed she even pretended to be “half-caste.” OMFG.

Update: Princess Michael of Kent released a statement saying she is “very sorry and distressed” that she wore this racist brooch to the palace luncheon, and she says it was a “gift she’s worn many times before, without controversy.” TMZ also notes: “A source connected to Kensington Palace tells us Princess Michael was not trying to insult Meghan or any people of color. The source says she’s learned her lesson, and is going to retire the brooch for good.” Racist a–hole is so sorry for being a terrible racist, promises never to do that one racist thing again. Whatever. Not forgiven.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.

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

379 Responses to “Just FYI: Princess Michael of Kent is a racist, and she wears racist jewelry”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Moeketsi says:

    #RiseAbovePettiness smh

    • Bella Dupont says:

      Yup…..I hope Harry and Meghan looked at the brooch, smiled kindly at her, greeted her graciously and then dismissed her quickly. She’s just looking for relevance at this point.

      • AV says:

        You *know* that one of the first things Harry told Meghan about his family was how backward some of them are. “Just look out for Auntie Marie, she’s super racist. And try to forgive my grampa, he likes to make a lot of sexist and racist jokes, but it’s totally funny, amirite?”

      • Eliza says:

        Princess Pushy is racist.

        With the Queen being so open to push Meghan and Harry forward, why would she pull this stunt in front of her and against her (alleged) favorite grandson and his finance?

        It’s the Queen ok with this f—ery? The DOE? Will there be repercussions?

      • whatWHAT? says:

        Bella, I agree with your comment completely, except that after the “nice to see you” and before the dismissal, Harry says “what an ugly brooch, Auntie.”

      • Bella Dupont says:


        lol…..i don’t even want them to give her that. Just casually dismiss her as she’s not one of the “key members” of the family.


        I bet she’ll act all doe eyed and shocked at the outrage….”what this ‘lil old thing?”. Privately, the other purists within the family and outside will send their congratulations and approval at her “bravery”.

      • babykitten says:

        You’re much nicer than me. I don’t think Meghan owes kindness to Princess Michael. I would look straight through her like she doesn’t exist. The days are over where POC should be expected to smile and be polite to overt racism.

      • Nan says:

        She’s all, “I do hope Miss Markle notices my brooch because then she’ll see that I quite like the blacks … er, at times”.

      • HIDI says:

        that “blackamoor” brooch is so offensive if its worn to create buzz or cause SPOTLIGHT “ATTRACTION ” ,anyroad ,all of them blackamoor brooches are WIDELY SOLD on the market as decoratve stuff without the intention of causing any offense

      • A says:

        @Eliza, I don’t think that Prince Harry is her favorite. But yeah, Princess Pushy is hella racist. And attention seeking as hell. This is hardly out of the ordinary for her.

      • Marley31 says:

        I’m sorry I don’t understand why they were invited I’m the 1st place I don’t like some of my cousins and just because there my cousins doesn’t mean I have to invite them over to my home for Xmas. I hope Meghan has thick skin and I hope The Prince is a Prince and has her back. Because it sounds like that women is just too much. And sometimes instead of being a lady and taken the high road sometimes you gotta put bullies in there place so they know they can’t bully you. So I hope all goes well

      • magnoliarose says:

        You just let long uncomfortable silences stretch out with minimal politeness. I wouldn’t ever miss an opportunity to let her know she was wrong subtly and I would do it every time I saw her with smiles. But with no effort to make her comfortable and I wouldn’t ask her one question about her life. If she asked me what was wrong, I wouldn’t tell her but continue to be chilly but polite.

      • jwoolman says:

        If I didn’t know anything about her or its history, naive me would have assumed the brooch represented some royal person ….. Looks like royal clothing and headgear to me.

        But then I’m just a servant myself, to cats. They let me wear t-shirts and overalls from eBay, as long as I’m prompt with the food and don’t accidentally leave one outside all night. “There are only two of us, and you can’t count noses?!?”

      • magnoliarose says:

        You are lucky. I am now a humble zookeeper to a dog, two guinea pigs, cat, kitten and a sassy cockatoo. Requests: turtle, fish and a bunbun. Oh and a sugar glider. But the only thing I may allow is a fish and turtle. A toddler has no right to have a bunny to terrorize.
        My grandmother had a massive turtle as a girl and all sorts of pets. She always had. She was telling all the children stories about her hedgehogs, and I wanted to throw a pillow at her because I could see all the smaller kids, nieces, nephews, etc. getting big ideas.

    • Imqrious2 says:

      I’d think that if she hadn’t taken off her coat when entering, and Meghan and or Harry saw it, Harry would’ve definitely had something to say to her about it (perhaps not in front of everyone, but he would not let Pushy insult Meghan). I just have the feeling that as besotted as Harry is, he’d walk away from the whole mess if it was laid out as a choice: put up or leave the succession.

      Besides, he may have the last laugh: aren’t the Kent’s supposed to be giving up their apt. In KP for H & M?

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

        I think I read the same about them being displaced, and I am certain that gave her all the more twisted justification in wearing it. What a garbage human being. Trash.

      • A says:

        Princess Michael is exactly the sort of person to pitch a fit about having to move. She’s also an attention seeking, thirsty ass b-tch, lol. And she’s a racist on top of everything else. The combination of the two, as well as the increasing irrelevancy of her and her husband (he doesn’t even have an actual title, he’s just Prince Michael of Kent) are probably the two things that grate on her the most lol. Hope she chokes on the jealousy tbh!!

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Yes, I read that, too–and I can only imagine how insulting that would be to a stuffy old racist like Princess Michael! What an awful, awful person she must be to EVER wear that, period, much less to wear it to her first meeting at the Palace with Meghan! It was clearly an intentional affront to Meghan–and to Harry for bringing a black woman into the Royal Family.

      • jwoolman says:

        Well, I wouldn’t be too happy at being forced to move, either…. A home is a home.

        How long have they been there? Will they be evicted into the street or do they have someplace else to live and just divide their time between two or more homes?

        Does the happy couple really want to live in Kensington Palace?

    • Audi says:

      That’s one you just put into Stupid Bitch category and move on.

  2. Other Renee says:

    The woman is evil. She’s everything wrong with the so called aristocracy. I always thought her ridiculous for calling herself Princess My Husband. Probably because she wouldn’t be referred to as Princess Marie so the title is more important than her own actual identity. Vile creature.

    • SoulSPA says:

      Yup. IIRC she is or at least was a Baroness at birth in Austria or their former empire. I don’t know if the Baroness title exists in the British aristocracy. Dukes and counts only?
      From all I know a Baroness must rank lower that a Princess and I see she cares that much that she chose to become Princess Michael of Kent. Or maybe she could not keep that title upon marriage?
      I remember the first times I saw her title and couldn’t figure out why a princess would have a male name. I found out eventually from here #CB.

      • babykitten says:

        I find non-British royalty confusing. How was she a baroness at birth? Google says her father was a baron, but somehow her mother was a countess. And part of her esteemed heritage is being the descendant of a king’s mistress, so she and Camilla have something in common. Interesting that the fact that she was divorced didn’t matter 50 years ago. I know she was only marrying the grandson of a king, and one who wasn’t an heir, but she surely aimed higher than what was expected.

      • babykitten says:

        I also just realized that she dumped hubby #1 to snag Prince Michael. I’m sure Anne would call her a climber. Also of note, the pope blessed their marriage.

      • SoulSPA says:

        That’s very interesting, @babykitten. Especially the part about having divorced. And then marrying Prince Michael. I read somewhere she had an affair with PK while married, maybe it was just gossip. As to their marriage being blessed by the pope, well, IIRC she was born Catholic. Don’t know her first marriage was a Catholic ceremony. Maybe not because otherwise how could the pope bless her second marriage? Social climber for sure. Not the only one though. But definitely arrogant and full of herself.

      • Ankhel says:

        @ Soulspa and Babykitten,

        there are barons and baronesses who are native to the UK. Baron(ess) is a fairly low ranking noble title, above common knighthood, but below duke and count(ess). Duke is the highest of the noble titles, which are all below royal titles. I have no idea why the English princes are so fond of their “lower” ducal titles, especially since the UK has a number of dukes who aren’t also royals. Perhaps it’s because the ducal titles tend to be given along with land and manors?

        Anyway, in Germany, they have different ways of dealing with rank and titles. They used to be very strict and stingy when it came to military promotions. For instance, an officer wasn’t supposed to outrank his living father. It was a pity for an ambitious captain if his father was a retired major in good health!
        But, when it came to noble titles, they were liberal and much less serious. Any legitimate child of a male noble would be born to the same title as their father. A grown baron, or Freiherr, as they are normally called in Germany, could have many little barons and baronesses in the nursery! I’m guessing Princess Michael’s mother did not take her husband’s baronial title because she was a born countess, which is a higher title.

        Naturally, this form of inheritance means that over time, noble titles became very widespread and common in Germany. Princess Michael has little to be so stuck up about – she was a low ranking noble whose greatest accomplishment was to marry a queen’s cousin.

    • lunde says:

      The UK press often call her Princess Pushy because of her rude and demanding ways. Didn’t she once even complain about the plush apartment they lived virtually free as the Queen was paying her rent?

      I think she said something about animals having no rights as they don’t pay taxes!

    • AV says:

      Princess My Husband is just the most formal way of addressing her, and she’s old school, so she does it in the old-school way. Meghan will soon be Princess Henry of Sussex, so…

      • whatWHAT? says:

        will she get a “Princess” titile though? Kate is a Duchess, right?

      • LAK says:

        She’ll be a duchess like Kate if Harry accepts a ducal title.

      • AmyLue says:

        @LAK – Am I correct to think that Kate is also Princess William as Meghan will be Princess Henry? There is a reason she goes by Duchess instead of Princess but I am not quite sure what that reason is….you probably know.

      • Wren says:

        Yeah, it’s just the official way to address her. I don’t know all the ins and outs of British titles but for that level, unless she’s given her own title (like Diana was when she became Princess Diana), she is simply Princess Husband’s Name. Kate is Princess William by default, but was given her own title of Duchess so that’s what she uses. If Megan is given her own title she’ll probably use that but if she isn’t she’ll be by default Princess Harry.

      • LAK says:

        AmyLue / Wren: Duke is higher status than Prince. If you have a ducal title, that is what you are known by. Thus William is now The duke of Cambridge.

        Their wives are given a courtesy title that is the female version of their new hubby’s highest ranked title. Thus Catherine became The Duchess of Cambridge.

        If Harry isn’t given a ducal title (or he turns it down), then Meghan will go by his highest ranked title. Just like Princess Michael whose husband, Prince Michael, doesn’t have a ducal title..

        The only titles higher than duke are POW and Sovereign Monarch, but those describe very specific statuses outside the peerage.

        Finally, Diana was never ‘Princess Diana’. That was a media created nickname that stuck. It’s too easy to sell Princess Diana to the public because princess sells. Just like people magazine is valiantly trying to sell Princess Kate to the world.

        This is how titles work:

        1. Daughter of title = first name in the title eg Lady Diana Spencer, Princess Charlotte, Princess Beatrice, Princess Anne, Lady Louise.

        2. Wife of title = courtesy female version of title. No names in title eg Countess Spencer, The Duchess of Cambridge, The Countess of Wessex, Viscountess Weymouth, The Princess of Wales, The Duchess of Cornwall.

        3. Widow of title = same as wife of title + ‘dowager’ infront of it eg Dowager Duchess of Marlborough, Dowager Duchess of Westminster.

        4. Divorced ex-wife of title = regain first name infront of title + gain a comma + lose definitive article of title + title eg Sarah, Duchess of York, Diana, Princess of Wales

      • Olive says:

        @Wren Diana was never “Princess Diana.” Only blood princesses in the UK are named Princess (name). She was HRH Diana, Princess of Wales, but the media called her “Princess Diana” much like People insists on calling Kate “Princess Kate” even though that is not her name.

      • LAK says:

        Olive: She was never HRH Diana, Princess of Wales. You’ve written out her divorced title, and added the HRH which she definitely didn’t have post-divorce.

        Her married title was HRH The Princess of Wales and her divorced title was Diana, Princess of Wales.

        If she had not volunteerily given up the HRH as part of her divorce negotiations, then she would have been HRH Diana, Princess of Wales per your comment.

      • babykitten says:

        @LAK, do you really think Harry would turn down a ducal title?

      • LAK says:

        Babykitten: the option is always there. And so is the precedent to turn it down. Famously Princesses Anne and Alexandra’s husbands turned down the titles.

      • Cee says:

        It is telling TQ did not offer Prince Michael of Kent a title upon marriage. Therefore Baroness Marie’s name is actually HRH Baroness Marie von Reibnitz, Princess Michael of Kent, as her husband has no title of his own but that which he was born with (like she was born a Baroness).

        Kate’s full title is HRH Princess William Arthur Philip Louis, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, Lady Carrickfergus.

        Meghan will be HRH Princess Henry Charles Albert David, Duchess of X, and any other female form of any additional title.

      • Olive says:

        @LAK thank you for the correction! I could never keep her married and post-divorce titles straight

      • LAK says:

        Cee: he may have turned down a title. We shall never know.

        Prince Michael wasn’t the heir to the dukedom. His older brother, Prince Edward, inherited the family title. Younger sons do not inherit titles, so it’s not mean or unusual that Prince Michael didn’t get one.

        PM being a Baroness by birth is unimportant because we don’t recognise foreign titles in the British system even if we recognise them socially. Her British title supersedes any other titles she may have.

      • babykitten says:

        @LAK, I hope Harry doesn’t turn down a ducal title. His title will elevate Meghan, and force others, who may not be so inclined, to treat her respectfully.

      • flan says:

        Ew, it’s bad enough that some women lose their own last name when they marry a man, but losing the first name too?… It’s like they don’t exist beyond being an extension of their husband.

    • dave says:

      she didn’t choose to be called Princess Michael, that is the way it is.

      • Molly says:

        Oh, she absolutely chooses to be called Princess Michael. You and your press shop decide what you’d like to be called in the media and in your official capacity as a royal. It’s the reason Camilla is called Duchess of Cornwall instead of the Princess of Wales. She IS the Princess of Wales, but it was decided she’d go by DoC, and that information was communicated out and used exclusively. Same with Kate. She IS Princess William of Wales, but she chooses not to use it.
        Princess Michael is just a straight C-U-Next-Tuesday.

      • LAK says:

        Molly, @ dave is right.

        Camilla is known as DoC instead of PssoW because the diana fanatics can’t and won’t let it go.

        Camilla was so unpopular, regardless of palace PR to rehabilitate her, that the wedding had to be fudged so it looked like HM wasn’t endorsing it, and using the lower title instead of PssoW to placate the public. Ditto saying she will be Princess Consort instead of Queen Consort.

      • Cee says:

        No Molly, that is her actual title in the UK. She takes the female form of her husband’s highest ranking title (and in his case his only title) – HRH Prince Michael of Kent = HRH Princess Michael of Kent.

    • milla says:

      I have no idea who she is. But the royals have shady past. And that is putting in mildly.

      • AnnaKist says:

        Yep, the kind of shady that makes some of us say, “Geez, it’s bloody cold here.” I cannot stand this woman.

      • Melanie says:

        her late Father had ties to the Nazi party. Supposedly she’s an unpopular member inside the royal family.

    • A says:

      She’s makes such a good case for why the monarchy and the aristocracy should be abolished in the UK. Both of them, at the same time. No more titles, no more dukes, no more earls, none of it.

    • jwoolman says:

      But isn’t that the old tradition? Like calling yourself Mrs. John Smith? More women use their own first names with Mrs. these days, but when she was young I imagine the older traditions were very current. People do have the right to choose their own names and which title they prefer. She’s been Princess Michael of Kent for a very long time, I assume.

  3. Steph says:


    • Alix says:

      What a revolting pig. Why not just go up to Meghan and spit in her eye?

      • Olenna says:

        Because she’s a devious bitch? I don’t think her own husband can even stand her. Supposedly, he creeps with the ladies (has a mistress?) and she’s got her own side game going with younger men.

      • Trashaddict says:

        Because the British aren’t that in-your-face. They go for the unspoken insult or subtle putdown, that way you’re not sure if you speak up, whether you’ll be seen as overreacting. Masters at it.

    • minx says:

      She is everything that is wrong with that whole “royalty” setup.

    • Nancito says:

      Wasn’t there talk a while back that her father was a Nazi? She denied vehemently, at the time, probably crying herself to sleep at night that she had to issue denials though. And, yes, that brooch – that’s Olympic level shading right there.

      • Dally says:

        Nah, not subtle enough to be actual shading, she thought she was being subtle but maybe because of her age she didn’t realize just how blatantly tacky and unsophisticated it made her look.

  4. DazLondon says:

    I’m having ‘Get Out’ flashbacks

    • mint says:

      Her own husband to be wore a Nazi Uniform at a “colonial” themed party. Yeah, his friends throw partys with that theme. He also used racial slurs. Plus his family is probelmatic. She will have to deal with this kind of people everyday.
      I wouldnt get into that.

      • Hikaru says:

        The BRF have literally made money by taking part in slave trade business, I don’t think the word “problematic” is strong enough to describe what they are.

      • me says:

        I like Prince Harry, but didn’t he also wear a Nazi uniform to a party once?

      • Olive says:

        @me “her own husband-to-be” refers to Harry. Princess Michael is already married.

    • Veronica says:

      Since Meghan showed up on the scene, I have been telling my husband that this family and these snobby aristocrats are not going to accept her. Oh, they may pretend to be polite to her face, but the snideness and back-stabbing are going to be professional level. I thought more because she was an American actress, divorced, but this is even worse.
      I think she probably has a thick skin, but really….anyone would be upset about this. I’m with you – she should get out while she still can. Cause this is her life now – nasty snobs acting like they are better than she is.
      Maybe they should move to Canada? Get away from the lot of them.

      • me says:

        You think Canada doesn’t have racists? I live here, trust me there are many !!!

      • tigerlily says:

        Veronica, Canada is no non-racist paradise. Not if you are an Indian and I don’t mean from India! I am a Metis (mixed race-Indian & European) but pale enough that people don’t immediately realize I am not white. My dad was very dark and said he fought many school yard fist fights over the word “half breed”. Being racist to Indian is very acceptable particularly in Western Canada/Prairie Provinces. Just this past week an Elder from a Saskatchewan First Nations was detained and searched in a Canadian Tire store in North Battleford, Saskatchewan because…doncha know…..Indians are lazy and steal. smh….my best friend is a Treaty Indian from Saskatchewan and I can’t keep track of how often we are closely followed in retail stores like the Bay and MAC. So please do not paint Canada as a racist free paradise.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I happened to be in Toronto when the Caribbean festival was happening, and I was shocked by the things white people said to us about the festival. Ontario doesn’t seem to have the best reputation as far as that is concerned.

      • A says:

        @magnoliarose, I live in Western Canada now, but I lived in Ontario before. If Toronto is bad, everywhere west of Thunder Bay is a far, FAR worse.

      • Peeking in says:

        Mag- part of the negative feelings people have about the Caribbean festival, formerly known as Caribana, is because there was quite a bit of violence in the 90s. Some people in Toronto still haven’t gotten over that. There was one time when there was either a murder or maiming at each parade, though it was not connected to the parade in any way. That went on for 3 or 4 years, but people still think of he festival as violent even though it’s been basically violence free for 20 years.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Peeking in

        Ah, I see. There is some history involved.
        I didn’t feel that as much in BC but I think the issues are directed more toward First Nation people and therefore harder for me to detect. Maybe?
        Still, better than the US. No doubt about that.

  5. BlueSky says:

    Yeah she wore that on purpose. A-hole

    • Froggy says:

      Agree. Exactly what I came here to say.

    • Erinn says:

      And she probably thinks she’s being SO clever.

      If that’s all the c— has got up her sleeve, I wouldn’t be too worried if I were Meghan. She’s clearly a moronic piece of trash – not even worth a reaction.

    • AV says:

      She did, for real. There’s no effing way she didn’t browse through her millions of dollars worth of historical family heirlooms before *specifically* choosing to wear this fugly piece. There’s zero reason to wear it to this gathering, none, even if she could *try* to find reasons for wearing it (or even owning it….). There’s no special symbolism – except for demonstrating what a racist piece of crap she is.

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Right. And in my opinion, there’s no reason to wear it EVER.

      • FLORC says:

        I think so too…
        I couldn’t find other occasions where she’s prominently displayed that piece.
        She chose it. Maybe subconsciously…? But she did. And she’s sorry we think she’s a racist because of all her other racist moments.

    • Arpeggi says:

      Of course she did. But to what purpose, really? It doesn’t seem wise to insult the fiancee of the Queen’s grandson/future Kings’ son and brother when you are a nobody (relatively speaking). She won’t have the last laugh and while the Prince of Kent can’t be kicked out of KP, they might end up having to relocate in the 3rd basement. She’s not that old so being on the younger gen’s good side will matter if she wants to keep her lifestyle as it is until she kicks the bucket.

      • LNG says:

        Who gets to decide who lives in KP? I always just assumed it was the Queen.

      • supersoft says:

        This. Wearing that broche was pretty stupid.

      • Hikaru says:

        Not if you remember that the majority of that family, including Markle’s future husband himself, are racist. She is only showing what others are thinking.

      • mint says:

        But then you are assuming that Charles, William, Harry and everyone else would be aware, that the brooch is racist. That she is a racist. Trust me, they are not. “But Meghan, its only a brooch. It was given to her by such and such. It means so much to her. Thats why she is wearing it”
        Her future husband once wore a Nazi uniform and used racial slurs and thought it was fine. They have zero awareness. And they are not going to change.They lived with this mindset for many years. And will for many years to come.
        A lot of people think that this is a fairytale come to life. That Harry is attractive and desirable. That the lifestyle of the Firm is. To me its horrible.

      • Arpeggi says:

        Yeah, I might be giving The Family too much credit. However, given the fact that there are pictures and that it’ll be in the tabloids and everything, even if it doesn’t stem from actual outrage, I’m sure there will be retaliations because they are, yet again, stuck with an unpleasant event they have to explain. I’m not sure that Princess Pushy is well liked to begin with and I don’t know how the older gen feels about the Kents (QEII’s uncle was a PR mess: drugs, alcohol, sex and debauchery, bastard child, whatever you can think of, he’s done it, it might tint their vision of that side of the family), so it’d be easy to put her back in her place at the bottom

      • A says:

        She wore it because she’s a thirsty racist who is desperate for attention of any sort.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Of course, they know it is offensive. Blackamoors were Arab Northern Africans in Italy and were thought to be a curiosity and making them became an art form collectibles. They auction them still at Sotheby’s, Bonhams, Christie’s, and other luxury auction houses because they are considered collectibles.
        They belong in museums or as history but not as jewelry. Dolce and Gabbana tried to relaunch the trend and got backlash for it.
        It is well known they are problematic nowadays. I wouldn’t expect PM to destroy it because they are antiques but all should remain at home as heirlooms.
        I think they are gaudy and ugly beyond the subject matter.

      • Princessk says:

        Well, I read somewhere that maybe Marie Christine , or whatever her name is , was trying to pay ‘homage’ to Meghan. If that is true it was a really stupid move. Why can’t her children, who appear to live in the real world, explain to her what is appropriate and not? This type of blackamoor jewellery usually depicts black people in submissive roles, often lavishly dressed up to look ‘noble’ even though they were usually slaves. It is also similar to the use of giving black slaves pompous ‘noble’ classical names like Emperor or Brutus, Bacchus, Octavia, Caesar, Pompey…the type of names you would give a dog. So these names just like blackamoor jewellery was to emphasis subservience and elevate the owner in a very twisted fashion. Surely ‘clever’ Princess Michael was very well aware of this?

        I also believe that Prince Michael and his wife are among the royals that have gone bankrupt and the Queen has had to bail out financially. Like most British royals they once had a ‘hice in the country’ but had to sell it to pay their debts. This is why Prince Charles is adamant about trimming down the number royals in the public eye living in royal places etc.

    • Sherry says:

      I agree it was intentional. Of all the jewelry she owns, she chooses that particular one for what is probably her first meeting with Meghan? Right.

      I remember all the way back when Charles and Diana got married. She was a ____ back then, too.

      Horrible woman.

    • whatWHAT? says:

      I agree with you and the rest. she picked this ugly-azz thing from all her goodies for the first meeting with a future Princess who happens to be black?…intentional and LOW CLASS.

    • A says:

      And note the way she’s worn it front and center, just high up enough for the cameras to catch sight of it as they drive into the palace, lol.

      If there’s one thing Princess Pushy was good at, it was knowing exactly where the cameras are so that she can grab the most attention.

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      That’s what I’m thinking too. Ugh.

  6. Crowdhood says:

    There’s uninformed ignorance and willful ignorance. She’s clearly choosing the latter.

    • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

      There is no way she didn’t know what she was doing.

      • SoulSPA says:


      • V4Real says:

        She knew what she was doing. But I doubt Markle would have put her in her place. Do we know for sure that Markle even knew what that piece of jewelry represented.

      • Bella Dupont says:


        I hope Meghan or Harry for that matter didn’t try to put her in her place. She would have come ready with some sort of retort of faux-excuse/explanation to explain it away.

        I hope they just ignored her and let the ugly little thing speak for itself.

      • Megan says:

        IIRC there is talk that the Kents will retire to more modest accommodations and Harry and Meghan will get their apartment. So I guess H+M will get the last laugh.

      • Moon Beam says:

        I would think Meghan would know that the brooch was pretty offensive without having to know the exact history behind it. I mean, one look at the pictures and I knew right away what the title meant by racist jewelry.

      • jj says:

        I received a similar pin many, many years ago and the person who gave it to me never knew what it represented until I saw it and said it was inappropriate(that person agreed and bought it only because the saleslady said it would make a beautiful gift, ugh). So I guess some people can be unaware but I think any person now should recognize how inappropriate and insensitive it would be to wear, unless that is the statement they are trying to make.

      • V4Real says:

        @Blogdis. What you’re saying is so untrue

      • tigerlily says:

        I don’t think “Our Val” (apparently short for Valkyrie) is uniformly well liked in the Royal Family. I think Pr Michael was a fave of QEII (he was a page at her wedding) and they put up with Princess Pushy for his sake. I hope that this incident will cause the Queen to admonish (at the very least) this POS so called princess….though the Queen doesn’t seem to like doing it so probably a private secretary will chew Princess Pushy out?

        I have heard that she thinks her “bloodline” is purer than the Brit Royal Family and I guess with a father like hers, she would know bloodlines. (snark) At the end of the day Prince Michael is a very low level Royal…45th in line? I did hear tht his mother (princess marina of Greece) kind of looked down on the Queen Mother as she was not royal but merely from aristocracy….LOL

      • blogdis says:

        @ v4 real
        Even the posters who don’t know the history behind it can see that is meant to be offensive. . But Meghan. cant figure it out ? ? even if there was no racist history behind the image ( when in doubt leave it out ) why wear it to that event of all the times ?

      • A says:

        @tigerlily, I’m fairly certain that the reason the Kents have so much drama is because of Princess Marina. I feel bad for her circumstances, since she lost her husband and had to raise three children by herself with much more limited means than she was accustomed to (or thought she rightfully deserved). But Princess Marina definitely had this sentiment that she was much more royal, by far, than even the Queen or her family (she’s descended from royalty on both sides, whereas the Queen’s mother is the daughter of an aristocrat, not a royal).

        Not surprised that that ugliness is rearing its head among her children, lol!

  7. Rhys says:

    It’s in bad taste and poorly thought through decision. However, if that’s going to be all that Meghan will be associated with, she, should not go through with the wedding. She is not only her race, she is also a woman, a humanitarian, a successful actor – the list goes on.

    • Bella Dupont says:

      No way on earth should she let a petty desperado like PMOK dictate or even influence her life choices in any way.

      As soon as I heard Harry in his engagement video say Meghan had met “All the key people”, my mind went to this woman. I suspected she would take that as a slight, even though she IS pretty irrelevant in the scheme of things.

      So, I’m not at all surprised she lashed out. It was no innocent mistake, this was a clear message to Meghan, but maybe even more so to Harry.

    • Lisa Giametti says:

      Successful actor?! She was on a USA Network show with mediocre ratings, so hardly a grand success in the acting community.

      • Sandy says:

        For an actor having a steady job for any length of time can equal success. It is really hard to make it in acting at all, and very few go to the top of the game.

      • M4lificent says:

        No shame in being a working actor on a moderately successful, long-running series. Compared to how far most acting hopefuls get in Hollywood — Meghan has done just fine for herself.

      • A says:

        She’s more successful by far than Princess Michael’s own daughter-in-law. Sophie Winkleman’s credits include four seasons on Two and a Half Men, of all things.

    • HoustonGrl says:

      Please stop calling her a humanitarian. She made, what, three appearances for a photo op?

      • magnoliarose says:

        No more than that. That is what she is.

      • Bellagio DuPont says:

        @ Houstongirl:

        The dictionary definition of a humanitarian:

        concerned with or seeking to promote human welfare.


        a person who seeks to promote human welfare.

        She is a humanitarian (they haven’t specified a floor or ceiling for the number of engagements necessary to qualify as one)

    • Jessica says:

      Oh, I’m sure that Harry is used to her and was WTF ever. Ignore her.

      • Cannibell says:

        I’m sure Meghan had gotten the tutorial on the extendeds before that luncheon, and was unruffled by that crusty dinosaur and her pathetic ways.

  8. Seraphina says:

    I don’t get it. Aristocracy and royalty money and THIS is what you buy and wear???? What a waste but just goes to show their effed up mental thinking. Rise above people. I don’t think she’ll be wearing it around “the big house” any time soon. Especially if she wants some of that gravy train from the Queen.

    • Tanguerita says:

      I seriously doubt that she bought it. It must be a heirloom – surely, no one in their right mind would produce something like this nowadays?

      • The Original Mia says:

        They sell them in Venice. Small ones, large ones…Blackamoors are very popular along the coast.

      • Torontoe says:

        Actually I believe dolce and gabanna got into some trouble from using the “blackamoor” motif in jewellery and clothing in the not too distant past, so racism and stupidity springs eternal.

      • Seraphina says:

        Toeronto, very nicely said. Stupidity is eternal

      • Princessk says:

        Yes, Princess Michael has confirmed it was a gift. All this publicity now means that the value of this little item has gone up.

  9. Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

    How low is it to wear this crap “art” period, and then with MM there? What is that? Really? That’s low, disgusting, and revolting.

  10. smcollins says:

    Why do I get the impression that her choosing to wear that particular brooch to that particular party where a particular person would be in attendance was no accident? A C-U-Next-Tuesday indeed. Ugh.

  11. SM says:

    Meghan can not and will not tell them to shove it. All you can do really is to be thankfull for being smart, passionate and open to others. This is what makes Meghan so much higher that these stuck up royals who think they are so above you. I kind of love it that nkw al those white, privileged people are forced to sit next to someone whey consider to be their possession, who may feel their class system is not set on stone and is in fact changing. This lady is a piece of work and you can be sure she is so furious about that

    • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

      What do you mean by nkw?

    • Bella Dupont says:


      You’re so correct. She (PMOK) talks constantly of “bloodlines” both for animals and humans. Her mother apparently made some comment about being sure that 600 years of their family’s pure bloodline was not for nothing…..(or something like that, i cannot be bothered to look up the exact quote).

    • Aren says:

      I agree. And I actually think it’s weird this (rather old) woman is devoting so much time and effort in trying to let everybody know about her inferiority complex.
      Meghan got herself a “hater”, in every sense of the word: An immature nobody who can do nothing to affect the life of the person she dislikes.

      • Princessk says:

        I think you are exaggerating to say that Princess Michael hates Meghan. This woman is just an attention seeker, I once sat a few rows away from her at Wimbledon and she made sure everyone knew she was there; standing up and turning around all the time. But she is a beauty. Her actions were clearly stupid and why did her husband or daughter not make her take it off?

        I actually think that Marie-Christine is quietly pleased to be on the front pages again but the RF will be absolutely furious by this bad publicity as they are being very careful not to be seen as racist. The press hounds however will be searching for any little sign of racism towards Meghan because they want sensational headlines. Unfortunately Meghan’s mixed race is the number one issue of interest for the media because it sells newspapers.

      • passerby says:

        Why didn’t her husband or daughter make her take it off? Better question, why did this hag think it ok to wear this? Only someone who hates a person/entire race would wear something like this.. especially to this event.

        Beatuy is totally subjective :/

  12. Surely Wolfbeak says:

    Her father was a Nazi.

    • Norman Bates' Mother says:

      Exactly – and not some regular Wehrmacht officer, but a member of Schutzstaffel (SS Calvary Corps), which was responsible for spreading fear and terror. He didn’t do much for SS, but the fact that he willingly joined it, tells all we need to know about his character. He lived a long life and I doubt he had a positive influence on her.

      She reminds me (looks-wise and character-wise) of my former employer, Bergit Countess Douglas, the daughter of Rudolf August Oetker, former nazi and head of the Oetker family. She is the most horrible woman I’ve ever met (I’m Polish, she is the daughter of a nazi, go figure how she treated me), and I’m sure the way in which she was raised has a lot to do with her character and how she treats others. Loyal members of the nazi party didn’t just magically become good, open-minded people after 1945.

      • aishoc says:

        Omg NBM – maybe I’m late but your comment inspired me to look it up, I had no idea Dr. Oetker was founded by NAZIS! Suddenly their frozen pizzas I used to always buy just became less delicious.

      • SlightlyAnonny says:

        Ohmygosh. Dr. Oetker? Dr. Oetker Pizza? I’ve eaten Nazi pizza??!!? Uggghhhhhh….

      • Norman Bates' Mother says:

        Yes, unfortunately. His grandfather was a founder of the company, as he invented a baking powder, but Rudolf August Oetker, a proud nazi, made it world-wide famous. I don’t know about USA but in Europe their products – baking ingredients, ice cream, pizzas etc. are basically in every home.

        They are also owners of Oetker Collection – collection of luxury, 5-star hotels (that’s where I worked for the Countess) and a bit of trivia – family of Pippa Middleton’s husband owns one of the hotels belonging to the collection – Eden Rock, St Barths. Oetkers try to pretend like they had no idea that the daddy was a nazi and they returned some artwork he stole to the heirs of the rightful, Jewish owners, but it’s more of a PR move than anything.

      • jetlagged says:

        Damn. Now I have to scratch a bunch of bucket-list hotels off my list.

      • jwoolman says:

        You mean the nazis weren’t a lot of fine people? But my President told me so!

    • Tourmaline says:

      Right. When I saw this headline I immediately assumed she was wearing swastika earrings or something.

  13. SoulSPA says:

    “Half-caste”? What does it even mean?

    Dumb choice of jewelry and arrogant AF. She refused to talk about WK in an interview, a light question, and now she does not need to say no to questions, if any, about Meghan and Harry. She says it all about what she thinks by wearing that POS. I can’t see it otherwise. I am curious to see if she’ll release a statement and explain herself.

    • LAK says:

      ‘Half-caste’ is a term once used to describe mixed race people.

      It’s been a long time since i heard that term.

      • wood dragon says:

        The last time I heard it and the only time too is in the old John Wayne movie Donovan’s Reef.

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        The half-caste thing is incredibly f*cked up. How is it even possible to think something like that? It’s so preposterous.

      • LAK says:

        I’ve never been a fan of westerns or John Wayne movies,BUT John Wayne has said some racist stuff in his life. Right upto his death in 1979. Frankly, i don’t understand why he remains lionised.

        I used to hear that term all the time when i was little. It was eventually replaced with mixed race.

        To be clear, as far as i could tell, it wasn’t a pejoratively used, but i’ve never really examined it’s origin. It was simply used to describe someone who wasn’t 100% black, and everyone used it, including my grandfather to describe himself (part Arab), and my 2 childhood besties who are part indian and part English respectively.

      • SoulSPA says:

        Thanks LAK. I would have never thought of that. I’ve only heard of castes in the context of India as per social status and some consequences. India is not a homogeneous country but I would have never thought that race had anything to do with “half-caste”. Even that choice of wording is strange to me. Isn’t she, PMofK, fully Caucasian?

      • LAK says:

        Soulpa: For awhile after i first learnt about the Indian caste system, i had to consciously remind myself that they were talking about class rather than mixed blood. Eventually i remembered the distinction.

        Mind you it helps that ‘half-caste’ fell out of usage so it’s easier to remember which is which and why.

        PMof K lived in Southern Africa, so i can see how she’s adopt that term.

        On the one hand, given her age, i’m not surprised she used it, but on the other, it fell out of usage some time ago so i *am* surprised used it.

      • bluhare says:

        Thanks for the education, LAK. I had not heard the term except in regards to India either.

      • Sixer says:

        When I was a kid, London slang had half caste as “‘alf chat” – used for any mixed race person (with mixed race being the UK version of biracial). EVERYONE knew it was offensive. Definitely used as a slur and if my mother had ever heard me saying it, I would have got a clip round the ear and a massive bollocking. (I didn’t say it, obvs.)

    • Whoopsy Daisy says:

      Yeah, I don’t know what it means either?

    • Canadian Becks says:

      “Mixed race” is a general term, no?
      A broad term that includes other terms that describes the blending of different ethnicities under its broad umbrella.

      I’ve read literature that uses half-caste more for describing North American Indian mixed with white European.

      Literature of a certain era uses the term Mulatto for describing black and white ancestry.

      And Eurasian is the accepted term for Asians mixed with white Europeans.

      • LAK says:

        Yes, mixed race is a general term. It refers to any mixture, not just black/ white.

        As an example, Alexa Chung (Chinese father, white mother) is as much mixed race as Scary Spice (Black father, white mother) as Sienna Lewis, Duke of Gloucester’s granddaughter (Maori father, white mother)

      • Enough Already says:

        My great grandmother is listed as a mulatto on the census and it still boggles the mind. Some family members jokingly referred to my mother as an octoroon and as a child I thought it was some sort of cookie :/

      • LAK says:

        I first heard the term ‘Mulatto’ via literature and history books. I always understood it to mean mixed race, usually white and a dark skinned race because that was the common usage of it.

        That’s why i give credence to reports that Queen Charlotte, wife of George 4 was mixed race because her personal physician often described her skin and features as being ‘mulatto’.

      • LAK says:

        Correction: George 3 NOT 4.

    • L84Tea says:

      In Harry Potter-speak, it means “Mudblood”. 🙁

      • Ankhel says:

        “Half blood”, no? The mudbloods were the wizards who had no “pure” ancestors.

      • LAK says:

        Ankhel: Mudbloods are the wizards with no genetic wizarding family background and have spontaneously developed wizarding power eg Lily Potter and Hermoine.

        Mudblood in Harry Potter speak isn’t the correct equivalent to ‘half-caste’. Half-Blood is the better reference.

      • A says:

        @Ankhel, @LAK, no. Half-blood in HP does not equate to half-caste here.

        Half-caste is a racist term. It comes from a system of racial classification as disseminated in the New World by colonizers. It is a deeply insulting, disgusting term to use. The analogue is NOT half-blood. Half-blood in the HP novels is not a slur, mudblood is. I would hope that if people are so insistent on using fictional analogues, they would at least realize that it’s the implications that have to match, not what the term actually means.

      • Carmen says:

        @LAK: Not spontaneous. According to Jo Rowling, muggle-born wizards have a recessive trait that may have been buried for many generations before it pops up again in a newborn. Like a blue-eyed baby in a family of brown eyes. It’s rare, but it does happen.

      • LAK says:

        Carmen: The main point is that the ‘Mudblood’ comes from a background that superficially has no wizarding history whatsoever. Reading the books, all the people called Mudbloods have no wizarding family members in their background, be they close relations or far relations. Their wizarding ability seemingly a huge surprise to entire family.

        I know that Rowling has revealed more background information about her characters, but i’m not a Potter head and haven’t read them, i am going by what is in the books rather than the extra anthologies. And the books make it very clear that mudbloods seemingly appear spontaneously because entire family is not only surprised, but they also react in ways that make it very clear that they were unaware of family history, recessive or otherwise. Like Hermoine.

        Half – Bloods are also very clearly signposted as wizards of mixed parentage whatever that parentage might be.

        In that context, i think half – bloods are a better equivalent to half caste.

        However, if Rowling says it’s a recessive gene that creates a mudblood, i can’t argue against that as it’s her creation. 😊 And of course it makes perfect sense in the genetic sense that you’ve explained.

        A: We all have different histories. My particular history didn’t use Half-caste as a pejorative whilst yours did.

        I’m not advocating for it’s restoration because it’s been replaced by other terms not to mention the negative history it has in other countries including your own.

        What we are discussing in a light-hearted way is which HP term is the best descriptor of it. Doing so doesn’t mean we endorse the word. It’s quite clear that the 2 words we are debating in the HP world are not positive words which by extension means we are acknowledging the problematic nature of the term ‘half-caste’.

    • Princessk says:

      She has released a statement.

  14. Alexandria says:

    This was deliberate.

  15. QueenB says:

    Wow, if you can see it through a windshield…

  16. aquarius64 says:

    The BRF has been promoting how they have been welcoming Meghan into the fold. Congratulations you just gave the Firm a black eye with this move. There may be a little payback: in the order of precedence this witch will have to curtsy to Meghan with or without Harry there.

    • NotSoSocialButterfly says:


      I wondered about this down thread, and I am delighted that you have confirmed it.

      Last laugh, indeed. Every. Single. Day.

  17. Joy says:

    Not only is it racist, it’s ugly and tacky. Just like the owner.

  18. Feedmechips says:

    Yeah, this was intentional.

  19. grabbyhands says:

    Oh yeah, that was definitely was on purpose.

    But not surprising for a woman whose father was an actual Nazi.

  20. Talie says:

    Of course it was deliberate….what a brazen thing to do! You’re that threatened by a biracial woman marrying into this family that you wear a racist piece of jewelry to show her who’s boss?!

    Sadly for Meghan, she will be seeing this fool often. They live in a Kensington Palace apartment…there’s actually a funny bit on The Crown in the new season with Margaret raging against The Queen for having to house all the royal “refugees.”

    • Carmen says:

      Of course she feels that threatened, especially after the family has always treated her as a joke. Knowing Meghan will rank way farther up the hierarchy than she will probably has her losing sleep at night. I wouldn’t put it past her to wear that thing to the wedding — assuming she’s invited.

  21. wood dragon says:

    Princess Michael of Kent has always been stuck up -even where the Royal Family she married into is concerned: she has expressed in the past that she has a more connected/exalted lineage than they do.
    Unfortunately this wretched woman forgets how minor SHE is within that same family. Stupid gestures like this will tick off those who can remind her brittle little ego of that.

    • Bella Dupont says:

      I reckon she’s also looking for an opportunity to go on a faux apology tour, where she can pretend she didn’t really mean exactly what we all know she meant with that brooch. Just another way to get her irrelevant name out there.

      • Lilly says:

        Good point and I love “faux apology tour” it’s so apt and describes what many last-tier publicity hos do.

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

        Aaaand it’s happening in the US press now. Imagine it is all over the Brit press, as well, and she has to answer to TQ.

  22. Chrissy says:

    God, I hope someone noticed it and told her off. What a hideous thing to have, never mind wear. What an entitled, wicked woman. Hopefully, Meghan and Harry didn’t see this racist trash.

  23. Josie says:

    Princess Michael is well known to the U.K. press, despite being lower down in the heirarchy (the Gloucesters and the Duke of Kent are more senior). Her father was an Austrian Nazi, she’s a Catholic (which means her husband is taken out of the line of succession). I also remember a story where she thought they should be added to the Civil List.

    She is an a-hole

    • Merritt says:

      Her husband is back in line now that the law has changed.

      • Josie says:

        Ah yes the law got changed. It was historical anyway.

        Kellybean – The Civil list was basically the taxes paid to fund the monarchy. It was abolished recently to the Sovereign Grant Act, and only the Monarch’s official duties are funded.

        Basically Princess Pushy wanted the taxpayer to fund her lifestyle.

    • kellybean says:

      What is the “civil list”?

      • SoulSPA says:

        Not a Brit here. I think it’s a list of members of the BRF that receive public funds in exchange for work on behalf of the Monarch. They receive some sort of allowance every year, plus the right to use certain properties owned by The Crown. For which they pay no or very symbolic rent. In exchange for said work. Charity, visits abroad depending on their rank.

      • bluhare says:

        It’s the sovereign grant now I think and it’s not assigned by person any more. I think!

      • Tina says:

        Bluhare is right. The Sovereign Grant is a fixed percentage of the income from the Crown Estates (used to be 15%, now gone up to 25% to pay for the repairs to Buckingham Palace but I’ll be shocked if it ever goes down again). Despite their name, the Crown Estates belong to the British people and are managed by an independent board. The 25% of the income is given to the Queen and she doles it out to the family members who do royal work such as Anne, Edward and Sophie. (Charles and his family are funded separately through the income from the Duchy of Cornwall, which also belongs to the British people).

  24. AmandaPanda says:

    She’s vile. I had a standoff with her at Ascot one year as she seems to think everyone should step off the paths when she is walking along them. Erm, no, irrelevant lady.

  25. Nina says:

    As happy as I am for Meghan and Harry (at least as happy as someone who doesn’t care for the Royals or celebrity weddings can be), my heart also breaks for Meghan. Imagine being so outspoken, so free to do what you want, to suddenly being expected to be reserved and to hold your tongue, WHILE dealing with family members (not to mention a public) who make it very clear that you are not welcome among them. And you can’t do or say anything about it. As someone who deals with anxiety and depression, there’s not enough money in the world that would convince me to marry into the royal family.

    • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

      I am sorry you experience anxiety and depression and hope you will find a way to eliminate that from your life.
      I give Meghan a lot of credit, I think she is strong and smart, and I am sure Harry is very protective and supportive of her. I am not worried for her at all.

      • Jessica says:

        Jesus. You don’t just “eliminate” anxiety an depression from your life. Grow up.

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        So me wishing that a and d sufferers improve their situation and reach a state of mental well-being means I have to grow up. Thanks, but no thanks.

      • SilverUnicorn says:


        I’ve had anxiety and depression all my life. It never goes away, EVER. Even when one seems ‘happy.

        I agree with Nina, 2 days into the whole thing would screw with my head and I would say ‘bye’ to fiance’ and all the crooks around him.

      • Bella Dupont says:


        Fair point, but it seems fairly clear that Pumpkin meant well…….Jessica could have made the same point without the unnecessary aggression.

        Anyhoo…..I hope Meghan is strong enough to tough it out. Nothing encourages bullies like seeing their tactics work. I hope Harry has a strong word in private with TQ and possibly Prince Charles to see how she can privately be sanctioned for such odious behaviour. Other than that, I don’t want Meghan to acknowledge the insult in any way. Don’t give her the attention/relevance she’s clearly craving. Just ignore her.

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        @SilverUnicorn: I am sorry you go through that as well. It is very painful to learn that there are people who suffer from a and d all their lives. Not that it can compare who actual suffering, because it doesn’t. And I really wish there was a way to eliminate it, like combining medical treatment, retraining the mind, identifying triggers and working on those issues, etc anything that will make a and d go away. I might sound naive, but I am not apologetic. I really want that hell to go away.

        @Bella Dupont: thank you, really. Of course I mean well.
        And I agree what you say about PH talking to TQ and PC to have her punished.

      • SilverUnicorn says:


        “So me wishing that a and d sufferers improve their situation and reach a state of mental well-being means I have to grow up.”

        I think Jessica expressed that rudely. I get your point and appreciate it. How I would like to get rid of it! (I’ve done CBT, to retrain my mind and fight it from the inside… it has worked at first.. but I was back in the hole after 6 months! 🙁 )
        I am afraid nobody can eliminate depression or anxiety, when we think we’re done with it well… often it’s when we fall back into it..
        I’m a rape survivor (it happened many years ago), but it annoys me when I hear ‘oh see, you’re doing good, you got over it’. No way to get over some stuff.
        If I had a Tardis… how many things would I undo..

        Even if it doesn’t show ‘outside’, there’s no way to eliminate some stuff from your life. We only learn to live with it and I think that is already a brilliant achievement.

        Merry Christmas to you and family x

      • Nina says:

        Hey, let’s not get into a tiff here right before the holidays, people! It’s cool, Pumpkin. I know you meant well. 🙂

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        @SilverUnicorn: yes, that is great achievement and I am glad you are doing better. Still, if something worked for a while but stopped working doesn’t mean that that’s the end of the road. Sorry if I sound obsessive about that. I hate it that a and d are so prevalent. And honestly, I found out maybe a year ago that there are people who suffer from a and d since they were children. I was horrified. Anyway, you are really much stronger than me.
        Nobody has the right to tell a rape survivor that they “got over it”. Nobody. It’s horrible.

        Thank you so much, and Merry Christmas to you and your family too x

      • SilverUnicorn says:

        “And honestly, I found out maybe a year ago that there are people who suffer from a and d since they were children.”

        I was probably one (as my father was abusive, physically and psychologically), but I was never diagnosed with it until my eating disorder nearly destroyed me in my 20ies. Oh I hate a and d are so prevalent too; I wish that wasn’t the case, of course. However, at least… we are talking about it? Only two decades ago we couldn’t even say it aloud as the stigma was far worse.
        Season’s greetings! x

      • bluhare says:

        I am climbing out of that very same hole right now. I wish you well.

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:


        Take that for what it was likely meant to be- an expression of kindness and support from one stranger to another.

        Happy holidays.

    • Chaine says:

      IDK, it just sounds like what happens in pretty much everyone’s marriage—now matter how wonderful your spouse, invariably there is going to be some elderly person in their family that is racist/homophobia/misogynist/ or a Patriots fan and no one else will say one corrective thing to this person or stand up to them, so you as a mere in-law tell yourself “It’s just this few hours once or twice a year that I have to encounter this awful individual” so you do your best to avoid/ignore them and breathe a sigh of relief when it is over.

      • Nina says:

        “just sounds like what happens in pretty much everyone’s marriage”, provided everyone is a figurehead and constantly being scrutinized by people all over the world.

      • SilverUnicorn says:

        “IDK, it just sounds like what happens in pretty much everyone’s marriage—now matter how wonderful your spouse”

        Heck no. Thank God my husband stands up to anyone who tries to trash me, even if it’s for ‘a few hours during the year’.

        And the BRF is not a normal family.

      • Snap Happy says:

        Chanie – your post made me laugh. I’m currently driving to New England to see my husband’s Patriots loving, right wing family. I’m gonna need a lot of wine to get through.

    • Luca76 says:

      I tend to agree I don’t find this marriage a fairytale I think it’s going to be tough but I wish them well.

    • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

      Thanks @Nina 🙂

  26. Sam says:

    Princess Michael of Kent is known for being a piece of work.

  27. Merritt says:

    Princess Michael is an evil racist woman.

  28. Marie says:

    She is also the daughter of a Nazi. Her father was an SS and a friend of no less than Göring. She has a history of racist behaviour. And she once again shows her True colour by wearing this especially for Meghan’s debut with the extended family.

    • flan says:

      She could have been the daughter of a nazi and distanced herself from that by doing good work and being respectful to every person she met. In other words, being a force for good instead of evil.

      Instead, she seems obsessed with bloodlines, which sounds a lot like nazi-speak.

      Strong people rise above their upbringing, petty people don’t and whine.

  29. Naptime says:

    Someone here was defending her as being open-minded here last week, and mischaracterized in past stories. There are so many Megan and Harry stories that I wouldn’t be able to find the post, but I’m curious to see if that poster will try to explain this away…

    • Ria says:

      It was LAK. I remember because she’s usually very well informed about the royals and I took her word for it.

      • Elaine says:

        Princess Michael was openly welcoming and excited about a potential Indian son-in-law. He was dating her daughter, Ella Windsor, and everyone thought they would marry. There was even a glossy-type story ‘Look at our house!’ in Hello magazine.

        But this. Is all kinds of wrecked.

      • LAK says:

        I am not going to defend this piece of microaggression. It is indefensible.

        I also didn’t mischaracterise any stories. I said i was surprised at the NYC incident given everything else i know about her behaviour and views especially because the NYC incident happened during a timeframe in which she was excitedly welcoming her daughter’s Asian boyfriend to the family and hoping they would marry.

        And when they broke up, she was publicly sad about it.

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        I take LAK’s word anytime anyplace.

      • Elaine says:

        @ Pumpkin. Me too 🙂

        People will surprise you. Observe the way she is looking directly into the camera whilst wearing racist-brooch. She mad.

      • SilverUnicorn says:

        “she was excitedly welcoming her daughter’s Asian boyfriend to the family and hoping they would marry.”

        I get what you mean… although, wouldn’t that be the same as some relatives of my husband voting for Brexit despite I’m a European citizen… It seems some people are perfectly able to dissociate whatever happens in the private sphere from the public sphere.

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        @Elaine – yes, I noticed that. She knew what she was doing, she knew there will be pics.

      • jwoolman says:

        Racism can be quite selective and not directed against everybody with different skin color. My pale 100% Irish mother was downright scared of black people but had no trouble with Asians or South Asians (from India, for example) even if their coloring was quite dark.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Just as a little defense of LAK, royals are strange as are some of the old high ranking European aristocrats. If you asked them if they are racist, they would say Absolutely not! And associate it with working, or lower classes and yet would do this but then the next day host the Obamas for a dinner party and fawn all over them. Without one bit of irony.
        I believe even her reasoning is convoluted and makes no rational sense. It is selective and mixed in with rank and old-fashioned snobbery.

    • SoulSPA says:

      I found the article and the comment. Published on December 12 on who would Meghan have to curtsy too. LAK’s had arguments as to why PMoK could seem racist or not, but from what I understand they didn’t put it in white or black. No play on the words here. Just read it for yourselves.

  30. Petty Riperton says:

    Trash! she wore that crap on purpose. F that old bat!
    What a way to un do all the royal family “we aren’t racist old fashioned creeps” PR than to wear racist jewelry.

  31. Pix says:

    This creature is so thirsty. She wore that on purpose and is loving any attention she gets. I bet she feeds on negative attention like it’s manna.

  32. Beluga says:

    This was 100% deliberate. So scummy.

  33. Wow says:

    I wonder if that is why it appeared that Harry and Meghan left early from that luncheon followed shortly by Will and Kate? Hmm…

  34. Svea says:

    Someone pointed out that the royal family might never see the broach since the coat is removed and given to servants. Thanks that Meghan didn’t have to confront that over tea or whatever. But the car photos are damaging enough and I hope Princess Michael is never invited back to a royal functiom ever again. That is what I would do of she was my “cousin-in-law,” and I bet everyone is happy to finally have a reason to be rid of her. Families.

    • CooCooCatchoo says:

      So… she wore this on her coat, knowing that it would be photographed and published after the luncheon. Yet she wasn’t brave enough to parade around in it at lunch. If that isn’t some passive-aggressive crap, I don’t know what is.
      I hope the snotty, sour bat is catching hell from the higher ups today about her stunt.

      • A says:

        It fits Princess Michael’s MO perfectly. She solicits attention. Always has. If you ever watch some of the older videos on YT of state banquets and stuff, she always looks right at the camera in order to preen for it, hoping that it’ll catch sight of her.

        She is the epitome of thirsty, lol. You can see in the second photo that she’s looking right at the camera. Subtle, much?

  35. Liberty says:

    Hedwig is a notorious shriveled-soul monster. And now, Hedwig and the Angry Brooch.

    I think MM is too savvy to engage with such a vile useless creature.

    • K-Peace says:

      “Hedwig and the Angry Brooch”–HAHA! Thank you, Liberty, for making me laugh even while reading about something that makes my blood boil. Like many others have said, I hope this vile creature is disinvited from all royal functions going forward.

      • Liberty says:

        I tend to think that laughing at evil-drenched creatures like this woman pierces them more than anything, because they do things out of hate to provoke our anger. We can’t help but feel our anger! But let’s poke them down a peg.

        Agreed. I hope this monster is crossed off every royal and social list.

    • bluhare says:

      Hahahaha. Way to ruin an awesome movie, Liberty!! 🙂

  36. The Original Mia says:

    I hope the Queen puts her foot down and Pushy specifically isn’t invited to the wedding/reception. This was a deliberate act to remind everyone Meghan’s ancestors were slaves. It was meant to sting. Since the only thing this crone cares about is status, strip her of hers. Make it obvious no one stands with this loathsome creature.

    • inthekitchen says:

      Not only not invited to the wedding, but I hope she and her husband will be kicked out of their KP apartments so Harry and Meghan can have the Kents’ space. Or at least let them be demoted to a much smaller apartment…in the basement…with no windows or heat.

      As someone mentioned above, I can’t wait to see this a$$hole having to curtsey to Meghan.

      And…can we also talk about the blackamoor painting William and Kate had hanging in their receiving room when the Obamas visited?? I hope that one has been sent back down to the storage basements by now.

      • Tourmaline says:

        The weird thing about the Kensington Palace apartments is I swear Princess Michael has been quoted saying that the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester should give up their apartment to Harry. Something about how the apartment is too big for them now their kids are long grown, and it’s near Will and Kate.
        It struck me as an obnoxious and passive aggressive thing to say publicly.
        Now this blackamoor pin strikes me silent. What.the.hell.

      • jetlagged says:

        Wait…there was a what hanging where? WTF?

      • Ankhel says:

        As far as I remember, it was a landscape portrait with some ruins, fields etc, some cows in the foreground, and a number of men and farm animals in the middle distance. One of those figures is a black boy, who’s looking after some horses. He’s dressed in normal european clothes; trousers, a doublet, shoes. Since he’s in 17th century Europe, he’s probably a servant or a slave. The others appears to be white peasants, and some white merchants on a road.

      • LAK says:

        Jetlagged: The painting the Cambridges had/ have in their drawing room was painting called ‘the negro page’.

        During the 16th/ 17th centuries, it became fashionable for wealthy Europeans to show off their wealth in the form of gaudily dressed black servant, usually a child. Soon paintings and sculpture followed until we got to the type of blackamoor expressed in jewellery and home decor.

        Lots of these paintings exist where you see the gaudily dressed page/ servant showcased in a seemingly benign situation. Always servant role. Very dark skinned, gaudily dressed.

        In the case of the negro page, it showcases the page looking after the horses and dogs whilst the gentlemen converse to the side. It’s quite a splendid scene, except for the knowledge that the page is a slave, and the two seemingly benign gentlemen are most likely his masters.


        The Cambridges (or their staff) didn’t realise that it might offend until moments before the Obamas arrived. They left the painting up, but they removed the plaque.

      • bluhare says:

        I believe the painting is The Negro Page and they hid the title when the Obamas came.

  37. HK9 says:

    She’s gotta be that one relative. Typically, those relatives don’t live all that long tho…she is 72 after all, just sayin….

  38. Neelyo says:

    Proof that ugly inside eventually works it’s way to the outside.

    Looks like she spends her days sucking lemons.

  39. Nev says:

    I am black.
    At least she’s open and upfront about it.

  40. Giulia says:

    F the royals. Especially British royals.

  41. Kiki says:

    This is what I will say about this. Meghan Markle will be fine. She is gracious, smart and a strong woman, it is Prince Harry I am worried about. Prince Harry is not going to stand for this. Frim the time when people who worked with his mother or supposedly “lovers” started to smack against Princess Diana, I think Prince Harry was the first to shut them down and told them off. So I feel that Prince Harry would told this vile and disgusting woman Princess Michael off and put her in her place. It is not protocol, but when it comes to Prince Harry, F*** Protocol. He lovesssssss Meghan Markle and he will do anything for her especially protect her for this racist c-u- next Tuesday.

    • LV487 says:

      It’s not about Meghan being smart or savvy or strong, it’s about a woman who was just slapped in the face by a future in-law. She’s human, trying to navigate a world she’s had nothing to compare it to all the while having the world look on as she attempts to understand an institution that has their own rules that make little sense to an outsider. The first time she meets all her fiancés extended family and this is what she gets, a racist brooch shoved in her face? I’d be in tears.

      • Veronica says:

        Exactly. And when our idiot in-laws do something so horrible to us, it isn’t flashed around the world the next day.

  42. Brenda Wheelee says:

    Let’s see if she is invited to the wedding
    Hope Prince Harry says No Way which will Love him even more

  43. Cee says:

    Meghan is not the first black woman to marry a prince.
    Prince Maximilian of Liechtenstein married Angela Brown in 2000. So Meghan is actually the second black woman to marry into a reigning family/dynasty.

    I do not approve of curtseying (who cares?) but I hope we get photos of Princess Cunt-y of Kent bending the knee.

    • MellyMel says:

      She’s the first black woman to marry into THIS family tho…

      • LAK says:

        Actually no,MM isn’t the first black person to marry into the family.

        That would be Joy Lascelles who wed the Queen’s cousin in 1999. She’s also an actress. Or used to be. Queen had to grant permission for that marriage.

        Then there is Gary Lewis. A New Zealander of Maori ethnicity married to daughter of the Duke of Gloucester since 2004. Often seen at official royal family functions, but perhaps he doesn’t register

        Here he is at Trooping the Colour (he attends every year)

        At a service at Westminster

        William and Kate’s wedding

        At the Gloucestershire polo with the cousins

      • Pumpkin (formally soup, pie) says:

        Oh wow, Gary Lewis, where were you all this time? He is incredibly handsome. Is he for real?

      • LAK says:

        Pumpkin(formally soup,pie) : Right?!😁🙄

      • Carmen says:

        OMG! *drool drool*

      • Snap Happy says:

        Gary Lewis is very handsome!

      • Cee says:

        Right on, @LAK. Meghan is by far the first POC to marry in, however she is the first to marry a Senior Royal, right? And def not the first to marry a Prince

      • A says:

        I appreciate the efforts people are making to point out that this is hardly new ground for the RF. But this is the first time that a black woman has married into this family and will be taking on a role that is so incredibly visible. That’s the difference here. The visible face of the monarchy has changed in a big way, a bigger way than it’s changed before.

        Let’s not minimize that by pointing out that POC have married private citizens who are part of the royal family. That’s hardly the same thing here, and we all know that. Gary Lewis is a private citizen. So are the Lascelles. This defense toes a little too close to the whole, “I’m not racist, I have black friends!” defense, and it doesn’t reflect well on the RF at all.

      • Lyla says:

        There’s also queen Charlotte, king George iii’s wife. The namesake of Charlotte and Charlottesville, Virginia among many others. It’s speculated that she was mixed.

      • LAK says:

        A: No one is minimising anything, just correcting factual information.

        These people may be private citizens, married to minor members of the family, BUT they attend the annual public family functions like Trooping the colour and all the services at Westminster even if the public doesn’t register them. They are the very visible invisible family members, standing right next to the more important members.

        I mean, Gary Lewis is always right there, next to his FIL, the duke of Gloucester, at Trooping the colour. On the balcony. For over 13yrs now. And people don’t register him. Perhaps they think he is the help!!

        Further, they are in attendance at private family gatherings so MM will not be the only non white person in the room even if her status is much higher than theirs.

        The point i was making is that MM is not going to be the only non white in the room behind the scenes or at annual public events even if she is at the front of the line as opposed to the back where the other 2 are.

        And then of course there is Queen Charlotte, wife of George 3. That debate has been raging for centuries as her contemporaries often described her as ‘mulatto’ and her portraits are ambiguous enough to keep the conversation going for all these centuries.

      • A says:

        @LAK, “They attend the annual public family functions like Trooping the Colour…even if the public doesn’t register them.”

        Exactly. The public doesn’t register them. That is my whole point, that they first and foremost private citizens who are not on the public radar and do not occupy a visible position at all. You can bring up the example of any number of minor royals who have married POC, but the truth is that MM is the first to occupy a visible, senior, position where she is married to one of the most popular members to boot. That makes a difference, which is why it’s of little use to be pointlessly pedantic about who the first POC to marry into the RF is.

        At any rate, her, Gary Lewis, and Joy Lascelles are what? 3 people out of how many? If we count all of the Queen’s royal relatives, then must be more than 50 of them (and that’s a low ball estimate). So 3 whole people, in a sea of 50, and that’s assuming that most of the Queen’s extended family show up.

        I’m sorry if I have sounded snippy or rude at any point in this discussion, but this is exactly what I mean when I say that this discussion of how MM won’t be the only POC at family gatherings is hopelessly pedantic. You may not agree, and that’s entirely your right. But trust me, as someone who has been the only WOC in a crowd of 50 people before, the one or two odd faces who happen to not be white don’t make much of a difference. Just saying.

      • Tina says:

        That’s true generally in the UK, not just in the royal family. The UK is 87% white, as compared to the US which is 62% non-Hispanic white.

      • LAK says:

        A: It’s endlessly discussed that the family is lily white and that is factually incorrect. The public facing side of the family is often accused of having prejudices which are really the public’s own prejudices being projected onto the family. No evidence required. Just prejudicial assumptions projected. From marital status to nationality to religion to race.

        Just last year, people were saying with certainty that a divorced, American, assumed to be Jewish, non white person would never ever be welcomed into the family on the assumed basis that non of these things had ever happened before. Nevermind the presence of Philip, Marina, Marie Christine, Sophie Winkleman, Camilla, Autumn, Brigit, Gary Lewis and Joy Lacelles who variously disprove those firmly held public assumptions.

        On the race front, various Windsors and Mountbattens have dated non white people before, including Harry. It’s simply not something the wider public is aware of. In terms of marriage, we can point to these two people, to be joined by Meghan.

        And so to your argument which seems to be that as the public doesn’t notice Gary Lewis even if he is standing next to William and Harry, it is the family who are at fault rather than the public. Therefore as far as you are concerned, MM is the only non white person in the family or the first.

        And next summer when she joins the cousins at Gloucestershire Polo and is seen interacting with Gary Lewis and their kids, that still won’t count because the public doesn’t know who he is therefore he doesn’t exist in the family.

        He was important enough for the entire family to attend his wedding, including William’s newish girlfriend Kate Middleton, but according to you he doesn’t exist because the public don’t know who he is.

        Nevermind the many articles written about his entry into the family at the time of the wedding.

        As for the argument of being the only non white in a situation, we live in a country that is over 80% white. I often find myself being the only non white in a town, sometimes the county, nevermind social situations. It is what it is. You’ll never have the royal family populated by a bigger margin of non white when they rarely socialise with them unless they make a concerted effort to do so, in a country that is over 80% white.

      • Cee says:

        @LAK – I wouldn’t trust a painting, it can be just as bad a photoshop. IDK if Queen Charlotte looks mulatto or mixed, I’m afraid I’m not familiar with “mixed” features. I can see, however, she had white skin? Unless of course she was whitewashed beyond reality.

    • Princessk says:

      @ A says….why are you calling her a black woman when you could equally call her a white woman? She is mixed race, and yes I do know about the one drop rule but I refuse to accept or uphold it.

  44. Jerusha says:

    I know those are split second shots, but she just looks mean.

  45. Green Is Good says:

    Boy, did this old nazi hag make a huge mistake. She may be getting (negative) attention now, but QEII will not stand for having her Grandson’s official engagements with his fiancé be besmirched by a shitbag, racist , low ranking cousin. A cousin whose rent in Kensington Palace is paid for by the Queen.

    Congrats Princess . You’re going to be banned from the wedding.

    • LadyT says:

      Oh I hope so. The Queen seems particularly fond of Harry, the brooch was deliberately chosen to offend his fiancée. Make the woman stay home.

      • whatever says:

        The Queen will probably reprimand Princess Michael of Kent because she was dumb enough to publicly show her racism but what about the other racist royals?, the closet ones who aren’t going to be as careless? The Queen isn’t going to bother punishing those because as history shows she likes to hide her head in the sand hoping problems just magically disappear. Meghan will end up suffering in silence because the Queen won’t do anything and the Palace PR will fight tooth and nail to keep any racist remakes from leaving palace walls.

        Good luck with that Meghan!, you’ve sold your soul to the devil.

      • WAU says:

        100% agree @Whatever.
        Let’s be all the way honest here, this woman is FAR from the only racist within the BRF, she’s just the one that’s more blatant with her racism.
        I have no expectations of that family all accepting Meghan with open arms, no idea why some commenters are, with their history, the source of their wealth, the jewellery they refuse to give back.. pardon me if I don’t believe that they’re all rallying behind this marriage.
        I also don’t expect Meghan to stand up for herself all the time, she’s going to HAVE to let the sly comments, that she’ll surely be getting, go. It’ll be exhausting, but if not she’ll be fighting too many people for the rest of her life. Harry is going to have to be the one to defend her from most of his family. At the end of the day, she’ll be considered a “stain on the royal blood” (I would love to have a discussion with someone who believes this, as though the years of inbreeding didn’t cause a stain..). I don’t even want to imagine what they would say to her poor mom.

        At the end of the day, anyone with eyes could have foreseen this. So this was Meghan’s choice, that she accepted the (unfortunate) possibility of it happening, once she accepted the ring.

      • whatever says:


        You’ re right . All this talk about the Royal’s welcoming her with open arms and excitedly lining up to meet her at Christmas lunch is absolutely false and an obvious PR move to make them look more welcoming and not racist. There a definitely other racists in the family, namely Harry’s beloved grand father whom he absolutely adores. Harry will defend Meghan for a little bit but forever? don’t count on it!. He is a Windsor after all, they are his family and regardless of what anyone says he still loves them. He’s never going to get off the Royal gravy-train and loose all is perks. So that’s why I said Meghan is in for a lot of suffering.

      • Bella Dupont says:


        I have to kind of disagree……at some point, this family was always going to have to face the prospect of “welcoming” a person of colour into a more prominent role in the family….It’s time to lance that boil. Meghan is a good enough a poc to take on that task as any.

        It was never going to be plain sailing, but I bet she’ll try to be shrewd and make allies wherever possible.

        Wrt Harry, any kids they have will be poc as well, so I don’t see him taking the side of racist family members against them. In fact, it might be a good thing this is happening now, so he can see what one of these “fights” looks like up close and personal before the wedding happens. Because once the kids come, they’re here…..no separation, no divorce from them.

      • WAU says:

        Let’s be honest…any children they have will be white, just with closer African roots.
        Truthfully, there’s a chance that said child wouldn’t be accepted as such by some of his (racist) family, but it is what it is. I’m mostly seeing a child that looks like Paula Patton’s son.

      • Bellagio DuPont says:

        Whatever their kids look like, to the true racists, they will always be black. Even if they are blond, straight haired and blue eyed…..as long as the racist KNOWS that there’s some ethnic ancestry, they will be considered poc and treated as such. After all, Meghan looks pretty white, herself and it’s not stopping her from getting it on the chin.

        I think PMoKent is probably one of the worst ones there though…..remember she grew up poor in Australia, probably dreaming of her family’s lost wealth and riches and bemoaning the reality of having to “mix” with the great unwashed, despite the “purity of her bloodline” and nobility of her ancestry.

        These kinds of people (as well as the nouveau riches and upper middle classes -ie essentially those with proximity to real wealth and class, without really being a part of it) tend to be by far the most aggressive when dealing with pretenders.

        Harry needs to go for some intensive pre-marriage counseling before they wed because they’ll go through a lot together, whether they like it or not.

    • inthekitchen says:

      Fingers crossed. We can only hope!! I hope that she will be banned, but am not really too confident of it.

      Maybe, to get around the Kents making some pap stroll in other racist gear on the day of the wedding (if they weren’t invited), QEII can send them on a tour of some small town in Australia where the ‘Nazi Hag’ will be bitten by a poisonous spider 🙂

  46. Citresse says:

    She hangs out with Conrad Black. Enough said.

    • kay says:

      dinosaurs of a feather and all that…

    • Imqrious2 says:

      Who is that? I Googled and just found he owns papers. I take it he’s equivalent of a Steve Bannon? (Ugh, made me nauseous just to type that hideous name *shudder*).

      • LAK says:

        Not a Steve Bannon, but more Rupert Murdoch.

        Depending on your viewpoint, both evil, but i think there is a distinction between the two even if both are evil.

        Conrad Black got his comeuppance. The only surprise is that his *wife didn’t leave him.

        *Barbara Amiel. Too long to explain, but i think Margaret Atwood based her novel the robber bride on Barbara.

      • Fleurucci says:

        Canadian(I thinK) went to prison for white collar crime, was a big news story then. for some reason reputable news websites hire him or at least give him a platform for random op eds like “trump is the most successful president” though he doesnt come across as a nazi, just an ´independent” thinker however I never like his articles

      • LAK says:

        Fleurucci: several things:

        1. I still enjoy the fact that it was his wife who precipitated his downfall. Apparently a taxman saw her home spread in Vogue, showing off furs and jewels and all manner of extravagant living together with a quote,’my extravagance knows no bounds!’, and went to look at their tax returns and discovered the corruption.

        2. Unsurprising that he writes such articles. This is a man who admires Duplessis, Nixon and Cardinal Richelieu

        3. Also besties with Henry Kissinger.

  47. adastraperaspera says:

    Another convincing argument for Republics over Monarchies. The top tier royalty we like to read about and think we know (myself included) are just the tip of the iceberg. As for this woman’s choice of brooch, I am betting she intends for it to insult Meghan Markle.

  48. This is my first time commenting on an article on this website. As a non-biracial professional black women who has dealt with so much racism and colorism, while I think what was done was crass, Meghan has been ok with proximity to not so great people.

    She has a lot more privilege that the average black woman because of her features. This has gotten her very far and has increased her access to wealthy and notable people. There is nothing wrong with that but when you fawn over someone like Ivanka (Tig, 2014) despite her father’s rampant racist birtherism or go to bars with Piers Morgan, I have to question your judgement when it comes to matters of decency. I won’t even get into the neo-colonialism of her fiancee.
    Is the brooch wrong? Yes. However, I will not expense my anger at racism on this issue when she has been ok with proximity to not so great people.

    • Akwele says:

      I would not classify an Intentional act of racism meant to demean an entire race as a piece of microagression. It’s vile and hateful . This recessive prune is an unapologetic racist.

      • LAK says:

        I do not think blackamoor art is a microagression. It’s egregious to the extreme. I think the way PM used it is a microaggression because i think she thought no one would notice or she’s being wilfully ignorant which is no excuse.

        I was pissed off when the Cambridges unveiled their blackamoor painting just as i am pissed off by this brooch.

        As i said upthread, it’s indefensible.

    • Akwele says:

      As a dark skinned African living in Australia, I couldn’t even begin to discuss the racist comments and discrimination I have been subjected to and the number of times I’ve had to brush it off just to get through my day. Like you, I have side eyed Meghan Markle’s association with questionable individuals however that does not mean that I did not feel the sting of this vile woman’s intentional act of racism. The message wasn’t meant for Meghan alone. It was meant for all of Us. If you don’t speak up for Meghan, you’re condoning this vile creatures actions.

      • ColorismSucks says:

        Oops, it seems like I posted twice.

        @Akwele – You seem like a compassionate person and we do share commonalities. As I said, the brooch was bad and crass. However, please do not ask that I speak up for Meghan.

        Did she speak up for black people when she interviewed Ivanka? No, not according to her article in Tig. A full 3 years after the birther brigade which was led by Ivanka’s father. The birtherism was meant for all of Us too. Did she speak up for black people when she met with PM? I highly doubt it.

        Is it not possible that Meghan is privileged and desire for a certain position may actually make her less likely to care about these things? Yes, possibly.

    • Princessk says:

      Why are you accepting and upholding the one drop rule by calling her a black woman? She is mixed race.

  49. Bridget says:

    This may have been a massive miscalculation on Princess Mike’s part. She may have gotten attention, but now everyone remembers that her father was a Nazi and that she’s a total dick. Good luck with the apology interview.

  50. thaisajs says:

    Well, if she ever hoped to be invited to their wedding and other future Harry/William events, that ship has sailed. What a horrible human being.

  51. Lindy says:

    Over Thanksgiving, my father in law gave my husband and me a number of family heirlooms and some silver that had been in his family for generations. They are from very old, Southern families who can trace their lineage back to low-level aristo families in Scotland and France. Now, my father in law spent his career as a civil rights attorney and currently does pro-bono legal work for BLM and for groups that fight against state efforts to suppress black voter rights. My husband and I are also progressive. But in this bundle of family heirlooms were two pieces of blackamoor “art” –an enameled silver spoon and a pendant, I think meant to be a necklace.

    We’re trying to figure out what the hell to do with them. We thought we’d sell them and donate the money to a local black voter rights group that’s doing great work here. But what if the purchaser is a racist piece of trash who actually likes those things? So we’re looking at donating to a museum. But y’all… when you see this stuff up close, it’s almost physically revolting. The idea that this racist woman would deliberately wear this when meeting Megan is vile.

    • babykitten says:

      I remember Oprah collected some of the dolls from southern segregation. They came from a racist period, but she was reclaiming history. The dolls would be black and look like the stereotypical “mammy”. You may find an African-American collector who would treasure your items.

      • Princessk says:

        Yes, I would buy them to reclaim history. I fully understand Oprah’s thinking. I also know other black people who collect black memorabilia as a way of explaining history. These objects are useful tools for education and should not be destroyed. Just because you buy them does not automatically make you a racist.

    • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

      Maybe donate it to a worthy group and let them liquidate it at a Sotheby’s auction? Or do that legwork for them? I’m sure some wealthy dirtbag would pay oodles for it.

    • supersoft says:

      Well, dont be so harsh about something you inherited, its nothing you have done as a person. See it as a reminder of the different times we had in history and how important it is to defend civil rights and human rights in general.

    • IlsaLund says:

      Perhaps the Smithsonian National African American & History Museum would be interested or could at least offer a suggestion?????

    • Lindy says:

      These are all really good ideas. I think we’re set on looking into donation to African American history museums so that we can be sure we’re not selling to someone with bad motives. I’m fine with the preservation of history as a way to make sure we don’t forget how difficult the past was for so many people. And it’s not that we don’t appreciate our families or hate all the heirlooms (both our kids have family names). It’s just that as white Southerners from privileged families I think we feel like we have to be especially aware of the dangerous ease with which family history (and heirlooms) get smoothed out and the ugly parts (racism and slave ownership etc.) get tucked away. We want to raise our kids to understand that history. But these pieces of art simply feel too toxic for us to keep. I think if they belong to a museum designed to showcase that history we’d feel a lot better.

    • A says:

      Those things–the artwork, the jewelry, the imagery itself–they exist as a relic of a time that’s long gone. But they also represent something that I don’t think America, or even the world, has ever sat down and actually managed to confront in the way that it needed to.

      Maybe look into universities that are doing research into racism or the history of racism or something like that, and ask them if they would be interested in using this jewelry for their work?

  52. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    Royal Watchers-

    Could you clarify whether Meghan’s future title will place her above this human trash bag in the aristocracy’s hierarchy?


  53. JRenee says:

    The smirk on her face says a lot

  54. Feeshalori says:

    This ignorant woman just shot herself in the foot with that racist move. She should know never to bite the hand that feeds you. I hope a ton of repercussions gets heaped on her and that supercilious smirk gets wiped off her face pretty fast. Maybe a relocation to the cramped attics in KP would be a good start and exclusion from the royal wedding.

  55. mazzie says:

    I can’t even be mad. She’s an irrelevant, old, white racist woman whose time has come and gone. She’s a piece of nostalgia, a piece of kitsch from a time that was only good to a certain demographic and she lives in fear of being irrelevant.

    Or she’s so entitled, she doesn’t see that. Whatever the case, she’s on the trash heap of history.

  56. Her Higness says:

    tsk tsk tsk
    things like this inspire us black people to be the unruly not well behaved well trained slave subservient respectful black.
    pisses me the heck OFF that she has to ‘swallow’ this crap and smile thru it
    deplorable old lady may she soon RIP!

  57. HoustonGrl says:

    There is no excuse for wearing this, she should issue a public apology. This is no different than a confederate monument.

  58. Katherine says:


  59. Cee says:

    Edit: wrong place.

  60. Penelope says:

    So utterly disturbing and appalling. I’m speechless. One can only hope that she was called out on her racism by someone with clout but who knows. Just sickening.

  61. The Original Mia says:

    Pushy got pushed back.

    “Princess Michael, who is married to The Queen’s cousin, has said she is “very sorry and distressed” following accusations of racism after she was pictured wearing a blackamoor broach to #BuckinghamPalace The brooch will now be ‘retired’ to avoid a repeat of the situation.” Per Royal Reporter on Twitter

    • Talie says:

      If she had to apologize…that means everyone at that luncheon is now aware of what went down with her. Hooo boy! That is going to be one awkward Christmas gathering!

      • Ankhel says:

        Well, we all know this woman wouldn’t have had a sudden attack of bad conscience. This means the Queen told her off, and warned her against ever wearing that brooch again. Good!

      • LadyT says:

        What a pathetic apology. It was a gift (denies responsibility for owning it), I’ve worn it many times (you must be the problem, never had one before), I! am distressed it caused offense (me me me- not I’m sorry I distressed YOU). I hope Harry stands up loudly and firmly for his bride and sets the marriage on a better coarse.

    • khaevman says:

      You’re #$% right it will be retired!

  62. crazydaisy says:

    She kinda looks like Uma Thurman’s evil twin sister, anyone else see that?

  63. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I don’t have words. And the fact she has a title and lives the way she does makes me ill. The sheer despicable, evil pettiness should carry steep, swift and sweeping consequences, but I’m currently existing in a bizarro world where sheer despicable and evil pettiness is running our country.

  64. Mar says:

    Without knowing how offensive this broach is, i actually think it’s beautiful. I have seen things like this and never knew they were racist. My boyfriend is Hatian and his mother has things like this around her house ( she’s black Hatian). That being said- I guess it’s about who’s wearing it and what the intent is…..

  65. themummy says:

    That she wore that brooch is just astonishingly disgusting. And it is not accidental. What a nasty piece of shite she is.

  66. A says:

    I’m not surprised. I knew she’d do something like this. She’s desperate for attention. Notice just how high up on her shoulder she’s wearing that brooch. Any lower, and the cameras couldn’t see it for the dashboard, so she’s placed it just high enough to get their attention. Old racist bitch KNEW she’d be making the headlines, and I’d been wondering just how much longer we were going to go without another racist incident from Princess Bushy.

    The Kent side of the royal family have always been thirsty af. The Duke and Duchess of Kent, not so much. But iirc, one of his sons is some kind of pro-life activist whose wife came under scrutiny because she faked one of her titles or something. And then there’s Princess Alexandra’s daughter, and of course Prince & Princess Michael of Kent. So yeah, a messy bunch in general, lol.

  67. LittlefishMom says:


  68. Ruyana says:

    No doubt, like so many racists, she thinks she’s being clever with her racist barb. Actually all she’s doing is making herself look like the ignorant petty jealous woman she is. And I’m sure she’s too old to change. And, most likely, aside from a temporary exasperation, she won’t bother Harry and Meghan in the slightest.

  69. TyrantDestroyed says:

    I can imagine her making her remarks the same style than then people during the party in the movie Get out. This is why I could never marry in this kind of aristocracy

  70. Lol says:

    Based on her history not surprised. Guess give kudos to those on Twitter and laney for giving this story legs. The American media picked up on it after laney story which made the British papers give it attention. It was even the top story in dailymail for a bit. Something tells me the British media wouldn’t have given it a second thought otherwise.

  71. Dame-ly says:

    I haven’t read all the comments but has someone pointed out the origin of this Nardi brooch.

    The first ones appeared after the second world war made by a Venice jeweller and they represent Othello- the Moor of Venice not a slave but a respected General with a high position in a white world, they were given as love tokens , representing the Othello/Desdemona analogy- a bit of a twisted love story but the designer meant well at the time, he made the first one for his fiance /wife . After the war times were hard and he started manufacturing them for rich tourists as something distinctive to Venice, they also produce other figures associated the city such as the Harlequin and Venetian Masks but the Moor was the best seller. Oddly even today they sell well frequently found at auction they go for around $25,000 to $50,000

    Unfortunately what started out as a tribute to a famous love story and Venice has become a pawn in the race debate. Times have changed and it’s best to just keep them away in the back of a draw or give them to a museum, like ivory and rhinoceros horn object d’art .

    • jwoolman says:

      When I first glanced at it, I thought it represented some royalty myself. It was still an odd choice, but I wasn’t really thinking “servant”.

    • StillTotalled says:

      Nice try, but blackamoor art AND jewelry vastly predate the second world war ( by centuries.) Even if a particular artist proclaims inspiration by a “positive” story (and what is positive about Othello and Desdemona?) there are too many tons of baggage that come with the trope.

  72. Dana says:

    The Kents used to do engagements they actually got the nickname rent a royals and they would go to the opening of anything. Up until a few years ago they paid a peppercorn rent they live at Kensington Palace but are now charged a much higher one. Princess Michael of Kent has been rumoured to have affairs one with a Russian who was murdered a couple of years ago. Wearing the brooch guaranteed some attention they have been ignored by the paps for ages. The Queen does this lunch to save having so many for the actual Christmas. Princess Michael has very few friends in the family and I doubt she will make any new ones.

  73. Scarlett says:

    I reckon Carole Middleton put her up to it . Both despicable women

  74. Anare says:

    No way the Kent woman didn’t know that her selection of jewelry was racist. Who the f does something like that? That little move was not only a slam on Meghan but a slap to QE2. Pretty disrespectful to go the the Queen’s home and behave so rudely. She should henceforth be ghosted. Not invited to anything esp not the wedding. She should be told that Harry and Meghan need more room at Kensington and the Kents should move their a$$es to Kent and never be heard from again. No disrespect to the people of Kent. Sorry. BTW that brooch is fugly AF and it sure doesn’t give me a xmas vibe. 😒

  75. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    The UK press have called her out on it, the Fail of course was the first to get the boot in. She knew what she was doing and did it to get attention, vile woman.


  76. Heavy sigh says:

    And yes, Princess Michael shouldn’t have worn that as she knew it would led to an outcry because the british tabloids don’t differenciate much. My guess is that she tried to create some publicity for herself and that she didn’t mind the disgusting racial aspect.

    Nevertheless I looked at the brooch a bit more closely.
    Princess Michael’s brooch depicts the upper body of a high-ranking person of colour likely african and likely a prince or king.
    The matter is this one: african paupers or african slaves wouldn’t be depicted in a monarch’s clothes. Blackamoor depictions of africans as slaves or servants depict african people in slaves’ clothes / servants’ clothes. Those clothes might be formed from precious metals but their style would still be servant/slave clothes style. But the clothes of the person depicted in Princess Michael’s brooch are the clothes of a prince or a king.

  77. Spring says:

    Breathtakingly bigoted & bitchy

  78. Question says:

    I am Seriously asking. Why is this brooch so offensive to everyone? Just because it is a black brooch? If it would have been a white brooch, would it be offensive too? I don’t get the point.

    • Jonesy says:

      So reading the 100+ comments (on this post and the one from yesterday) before yours didn’t give you any information, insight, or clue, huh?

  79. Burdseyeview says:

    she mustve worn that brooch because she couldnt find her swastika….

  80. Marianne says:

    She knew exactly what she was doing when she put it on. No excuses

  81. aquarius64 says:

    I was sad for Meghan for this happening but the fact that she outranks the witch gives some comfort. Also Princess Mike will be forever tied to Brooch-gate. News and social media will never let her live this down, especially if she and Meghan are in the same room. If this continues to drag the Firm down the queen may have to take extra measures with this dumb woman.

  82. khaevman says:

    What an old-fart, irrelevant, fading-out racist. BYE. Stupid move, not even subtle. Meghan is a breath of fresh air, IMO, and I wish her and her future husband every happiness.

  83. DAWN says:

    I really don’t appreciate this “white gaze” notion that Black people (women specifically, in this case) were not royal prior to Europe’s plague ( which they were recivilized out of, by Moors [royal] themselves for 700+ years). They taught Europeans to bathe, science, mathematics, medicine, architecture, art…Their history has been majorly whitewashed. They’re all over historical journals, paintings, sculptures. Those noses of sculptures are knocked off for reason.

    *Amanirenas, Tiye, Yaa Asantewaa, NZinga, Aminatu, Makeda, The Kandake/Candace queens, Hatshepsut, Nefertiti, Nandi*…Please.

    Some did not want to be addressed as even queen and demanded to be respected as Pharoah.

    I’ve spoken to many Black women who completely chuckle at this notion.

    Ignorance is bliss.

  84. MsLib says:

    In the 1990′s I was active in my union. During a visit to my state representative to discuss funding for education, I noticed a pair of ‘Blackamoor” figurine lamps. I was aghast! Even back then it was extremely racist. I tried to get others on the band wagon to point this out against this a-hole but there was no avenue such as Facebook to let people know about this man. Disgusting, horrible racist people!