Meghan Markle received gifts of spoons & aprons, and says Harry is ‘a feminist too’

Prince Harry and fiancee Meghan Markle during a visit to Cardiff Castle as part of their royal duties

Here are some additional photos from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s trip to Cardiff (in Wales) on Thursday. They visited Cardiff Castle and enjoyed themselves immensely, or at least that’s how it seemed. Something I enjoy is that the British tabloids and establishment royal-watchers keep downplaying the idea that Meghan could be an enormously popular figure for the royal family. At every event Meghan has done, people have been going absolutely crazy for her. Even more than that, Meghan seems to thrive in those kinds of environments, where she gets to meet regular people and make chit-chat. She has, as they say, the common touch.

I’m trying to include some photos of Meghan without the Stella McCartney coat – she wore a cute plaid blouse/jacket thing when they were inside the castle. Apparently, the plaid/tartan is “the Prince of Wales plaid.” It’s from Theory. It was on sale for $195, and I’m sure it’s already sold out.

Interestingly enough, Meghan spoke to a young woman who complimented Meghan for her outspoken feminist statements in the past. Meghan’s reaction? She said Harry is “a feminist too.” Here’s the exchange:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may be from two different sides of the pond, but they share at least one common value: They’re both feminists. Meghan confirmed as much during Thursday’s visit to Cardiff, Wales, where she and Harry meet with the crowds who waited to greet them outside Cardiff Castle. One fan, Jessica Phillips, 23, told Meghan how she admired her outspoken views on women’s rights and feminism.

“He’s a feminist too, so there’s that,” Meghan told Phillips.

“She was so lovely,” said Phillips. “I said it was really lovely to have a feminist in the royal family, and she said Harry is a feminist too.”

[From People]

Is he though? Is Harry the Woke Bae of the Windsors? I’m not going to go that far, but I feel comfortable saying he’s probably the most feminist of the male Windsors, surely.

What else? The royals have to publicly declare all of the gifts they received every year, and we learned that one of the first gifts ever given to Meghan (immediately following the engagement) was an APRON from Finland. Prince William accepted the gift on her behalf while he was on tour in Finland. Personally, I’m not offended by aprons in general, nor this apron specifically. If the apron came with a note that said “get back into the kitchen and make me a sandwich,” then I would be offended. While in Cardiff, Meghan and Harry also received a gift from the city – hand-crafted spoons engraved with their initials. They are called Love Spoons and it’s a Welsh tradition. People are really dying for Meghan to get in the kitchen, huh?

Prince Harry and fiancee Meghan Markle during a visit to Cardiff Castle as part of their royal duties

Prince Harry and fiancee Meghan Markle during a visit to Cardiff Castle as part of their royal duties

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid and Pacific Coast News.

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

226 Responses to “Meghan Markle received gifts of spoons & aprons, and says Harry is ‘a feminist too’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Anastasia says:

    Awww, those spoons are really cool. Wood and intricately carved. I’d love a pair.

  2. Nicole says:

    I don’t think will or harry are woke in the least. But sure.
    Meghan yes. Years of evidence backing that up. She’s a feminist in the sense of words and action

    • Tina says:

      I feel like anyone who’s a friend of Michelle Obama has to be at least a little bit woke. On William I agree with you.

      • Ann says:

        How can we be sure Michelle and Harry are friends? They worked well together but then Obamas are professionals.
        And pertinent to mention that with all access to secret service, Michelle’s daughter interned for Harvey weinstein! One’s own wokeness cannot be applied to work-friends and certain choices …Harry the feminist who really rallied for feminism in Vegas and through all his escapades to the very recent past!

      • Tina says:

        She’s called him her friend on twitter and at public events. I’m certainly not suggesting that he’s as aware as Michelle Obama of such issues or that the Obamas would call on him for something on racism or feminism, but I just couldn’t see her bonding with him if he was as unreconstructed as, say, Philip.

      • Nicole says:

        actually i don’t. harry works with the obamas on specific initiatives. however i doubt harry is the person they would call for something on racism or feminism. i just don’t. i don’t think he hates women or thinks they should be in the kitchen (i doubt meghan would stand for it) but i don’t think he’s an active feminist.

      • Ann says:

        Agreed tina – but the term “friend” is so often used loosely especially by famous people…I mean what else would she call him? Imagine michelle saying – And lets welcome The spare of the heir to the heir of UK’s monarchy, who happens to work for the veterans which is something Dr.Biden and I do too…hence we are working together” . For public purposes, they had an easy working equation but I wonder if that qualifies as friendship. Now Dr.Jill BIden and Michelle for sure would be actual friends given both their interviews….

        I wonder if Harry graspes the meaning of feminism considering how he referred to Kate as Limpet – woman dating his brother! If he was such a feminist Meghan would not have shut down her social media, nor left her job,,,,,

      • Tina says:

        Harry and Michelle (and Harry and Barack) both have very easy, relaxed body language when they are around each other. I don’t have any trouble believing that they have a decent friendship, as famous people go. (Contrast that to how stiff he was with Melania).

        I also don’t think it’s entirely fair to blame Harry for Meghan shutting down her social media and leaving her job. That would have been the case for anyone marrying someone in Harry’s position. Blame the patriarchy for that, but Harry’s not in a position to change how the royal family operates. And I mean, Meghan didn’t have to say Harry was a feminist. She knows him better than we do, after all. She could easily have said something like, “there are lots of feminists in the royal family” without naming names.

      • Ann says:

        Ofcourse Harry can bring a real change if he was so inclined. Thats why he cannot be called woke. For someone in his position – he will never be king lets face it…why would i be so difficult for him to continue his military veteran work , run a full fledged NGO while still representing his grandmother- and his wife continuing her job – the netherland monarchy does it wonderfully- all the kings brothers & families have fulltime jobs ..infact within UK- Peter and Zara have their own work- granted they dont have titles but they still represent the Queen on certain events….So long story short – Harry was surely in a position to change but he is as entitled as his brother and this easier life is what he prefers- just that he has better media/people-charming game.

      • Tina says:

        This is up to Charles. He’s the one who wants to streamline the working royals down to him and Camilla, William and Kate and Harry and Meghan. I totally agree that Harry could and should work more, but you can have good principles and still be lazy. I am not a pearl clutcher by any means, but it simply wouldn’t be possible for Meghan to continue working as an actress and be married to the son and brother of the King. Sophie Rhys Jones tried to carry on working and it ended in tears.

      • Ann says:

        What happened with Sophie was a different time plus she owned her business and hence the issue of ‘profit by association’ was more directly relevant…for meghan’s job of acting that wont be the case. And it is 2018. Harry and Meghan could have totally decided to hold on to regular jobs. And Charles would not oppose it- it would be bad optics,…truth is Meghan had no future ahead and this so-called sacrifice seems great on paper.
        And by the way, lest this sounds like Harry bashing – I dont think Meghan is truly a feminist in way at all. So they are a good match as they both seem to like light weight duties and royal life that entails these easy events and trips to Monaco, etc.

      • Merritt says:


        Meghan had no future ahead? What does that mean? Do you think that if she wasn’t marrying a Prince that she would have been incapable of getting another acting job after Suits?

      • Ann says:

        Meritt- Look at her career graph- before marrying her first husband who is an executive producer -she had barely any gigs…Suits happened with him and she doesnt have the best of roles in that either-nor is she a good actress..She is just v v pretty…but in reality she had very limited options, this royal gig is for life, all expenses paid and barely any accountability- couldnt be topped by any acting offer she “might” have got. So yes, she would not have much to act past-Suits.

      • Nick says:

        Michelle is friends with George W. Would you call him “woke”? (I hate that word BTW)

      • SoulSPA says:

        @Ann: I kind of agree that Meghan would have had limited career opportunities if only for what’s been said on this site. But we’ll never know. I mean, who knows if she couldn’t have had some good acting opportunities after Suits.
        And she’s tried her hand at lifestyle blogging, some commercial activities and charity. IMHO Meghan did not focus on acting only. She’s done more and networked, networked, networked. She wouldn’t be the only one either to do that.

      • Merritt says:


        That is not really true. She started dating her ex-husband over five years before Suits. They didn’t get married until after she started on the show. So it is not fair to claim her ex-husband is the reason she had work. And your claim that she had limited options is false. She could have left the film and tv industry, gotten a Master’s degree and had a regular job.

      • Tina says:

        @Ann, so only people who work full time in socially responsible jobs are allowed to be feminists? I know a lot of stay at home mothers who would feel very affronted to learn that they’re not real feminists. And Michelle isn’t friends with W. She tolerates him. Big difference in the body language with him and with Harry.

      • Tina says:

        @Nick, I believe he genuinely likes her (who wouldn’t?) But that smile when he leaned into her looked a bit forced to me. I think the distinction is that when Michelle sees W at events that former presidents and their spouses attend, they’re friendly, sure. But she and Harry seem to actively like each other and make plans to see each other outside of events that they both have to attend (as do Harry and Barack).

      • perplexed says:

        My comment might not be relevant. Never mind.

      • magnoliarose says:

        You can like someone but not like everything they stand for but find their personalities charming. GW loves her and has always been kind to her. His policies were not all his, and we have no idea what they have talked about privately.

        As for Harry and Meghan. He has done charities for girls only and did a whole interview about it. He seems to have grown since his friendship with the Obamas and now Meghan.

        If you like Michelle Obama and respect her, then you should respect her judgment about the people she accepts in her life. You don’t get to decide who she decides is her friend just because you don’t like Meghan or Harry.

        Harry and George W aren’t connected, so I don’t see the point of that conflation.

      • Ann says:

        Tina- I never spoke of anyone else besides Meghan. So your bias of stay at home shows not mine. And she was with her ex husband for 10 y not 5
        Perplexed- dating was not tough for meghan- she was living in with Cory when overlap with Harry happened…so it was not as if the sea was so dry for her.

      • Tina says:

        I just don’t see how Meghan is not a feminist because she has decided to marry into the royal family and give up acting or how Harry is not a feminist because he doesn’t do enough work. Being a feminist is about beliefs.

      • Ann says:

        Tina- beliefs mean very little without action…Harry and Meghan are not oppressed individuals without means…they have every opportunity to “act” ! Nothing is stopping them to act on their beliefs..and they are – they belive in the royal/peasant divide and they act like it. they are not feminists.

      • Tina says:

        How do you know that they believe in the “royal/peasant divide”? Just because Harry hasn’t renounced his title? And both Meghan and Harry have made speeches about women’s rights. Could they do more? Sure. We all could do more. But as Emma Watson once said, “if you stand for equality, you’re a feminist.”

      • Sunshine mama says:

        Methinks Ann does not care for Meghan.

        Totally would like your advice on a wardrobe issue. If possible you can tweet me so as not to threadjack. If not possible could you tell me your favorite career line?

      • Ann says:

        Tina- no point arguing mindlessly so I wont argue with you. Its not about titles…Rania is Queen of Jordan and she has done tremendous work despite being a woman in Middle East…she uses social media brilliantly..and she has top notch fashion sense… so it has nothing to do with titles…Harry has lived in a bubble and meghan is an opportunist…I can only laugh at your simpleness that you think making a speech is all that counts…

      • Merritt says:


        And there it is. You believe made up stories about Meghan and use that as an excuse. Also Rania is a questionable example, since her social media seems rather tone deaf to the realities of life for people in Jordan.

      • Tina says:

        Well I’m happy to be “simple.” And my belief is, in fact, simple: If you believe in equality, you’re a feminist. You clearly think something more than that is required.

      • Veronica says:

        I love the obamas but they were friends with Weinstein so this argument doesn’t hold water. And Feminism is not just believing things: it is working toward those beliefs, fighting for them, living by them. Meghan gave up everything about her old life to have a title, money and people curtsy to her. Feminist? Humanist? Huh! Meanwhile, Harry is giving up nothing – not one thing. He isn’t “woke” about feminism or racial issues. Please.
        Stop trying to make this barely educated dolt who has some charm into somebody who believes in equality. If he did, he would at least fight for it within his own privileged little bubble of wealth and aristocrats.
        Harry is as woke as his brother is. That is to say: Not one iota.

      • Tina says:

        Even leaving Harry and Meghan aside, I think this kind of view is hugely problematic. We have enough problems in feminism, problems of intersectionality, etc, without having some kind of litmus test for who is a real feminist. If you say you are, and don’t through your actions do anything to work against what you say (and Harry is not responsible for having been born a prince), then you are. Since Harry did the work on himself of going to therapy and working on his issues, his actions have been in line with feminism and social justice. And I 100% believe that the Obamas knew nothing about Harvey Weinstein’s proclivities. They would not have let Malia intern there if they had even the slightest clue.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Zara and Peter never represent the Queen, nor do Beatrice or Eugenie. Any charity work they do they do on their personal time, of their own volution, and in their own names. Even when B&E went to Germany to kick off the pro-UK campaign, they went as private citizens not representatives of HM.

        In the other monarchies mentioned, it is the tradition that the younger siblings of the heir are raised from day one to go out and earn their livings. That is not the case in the BRF. Example Martha-Louise of Norway who went from Her Royal Highness to Her Highness when she went out to earn her living.

        In most cases in the other European examples, they only do a handful of events like show up for National Day for X country; they are not out representing the monarch on global duties. If Charles is slimming down to 6 royals, that means “full-time” (whatever full time royal means, William) not Meghan or Harry working on the side.

      • Veronica says:

        Tina, I just can’t comprehend how you are a feminist by saying you are a feminist. I know lots and lots of people who would say they are a feminist, and then act contrary to being a feminist in every single way!! Talk is cheap, and means nothing.
        And I’m also unsure what Harry has done since being in therapy that shows his feminist ways? Really? What? Cause I’m not being snarky here, I’m really trying to think of one thing he did that shows he is a feminist. That Meghan is giving up everything and he is giving up not one thing for this marriage seems to be anti-feminist in every way.
        I see Harry as selfish, self-involved, self-congratulatory, immature and tone deaf in almost every way except for some charity work he has done. I certainly no longer see Meghan as a feminist, and I have never seen Harry as a feminist and I don’t see one bit of evidence that shows his feminist ways.

      • Sunshine mama says:

        “We need to acknowledge that so many countries and cultures are failing to protect the opportunities of young women and girls in the way they do for boys.”
        Prince Harry – Nepal Girls’ Summit, March 2016

        “When we empower girls hungry for education, we cultivate women who are emboldened to effect change within their communities and globally. If that is our dream for them, then the promise of it must begin with us. Period.”
        Meghan Markle – International Women’s Day 2017

      • Tina says:

        @Veronica, read this speech: It didn’t cost Harry anything, but he didn’t have to do it either. (And William, certainly, has done nothing of the kind.) He acknowledges his friendship with Michelle Obama as significant in his understanding of the issues. Instead of a blonde posho like every other woman he has dated, he is marrying an older, divorced, mixed-race foreign woman. Harry isn’t perfect and I don’t think he’s some paragon of wokeness or anything. But when blokes claim to be feminists and act accordingly, I think we should believe them.

      • Jessica says:

        Why on earth is Weinstein being brought up with the Obamas as if they were best freakin’ friends. He was a donor who had a reputation of being a good producer and bringing more diverse films to the movie screen. That is right up the Obamas alley; they were not friends as in going out for drinks and sharing life memories. It was a professional relationship.

      • Veronica says:

        Tina, that is my point. Words. Nice words. Where are his actions?

      • Wisdomheaven says:

        It is also worth mentioning that Harry has been doing a huge push to support women’s sports. Check out his work with the women’s rugby league. He specifically worked with the BBC4 staff on his editor residency to include more pieces on women’s athletics in the sports reporting too. Part of this visit in Wales was in support young girls in sports, y’all. Folks should really read and watch the information about the visits they do…if you are going to comment on them at least.

      • Tina says:

        And my point is that a) actions are nice, but not necessary, and b) making a speech is taking an action.

      • perplexed says:

        ” That Meghan is giving up everything and he is giving up not one thing for this marriage seems to be anti-feminist in every way.”

        In this particular instance, do either of them really have a choice that would change the outcome of the institution they’re a part of? He was born into an institution that works a certain way. He has to conform to it as much as she does. Theoretically, he could give up his princely title and its entitlements, but in the end I’m not sure what that would accomplish — the institution would still exist. Theoretically, she could turn down his marriage proposal and his love (and the privileges that come with loving him temporarily or permanently, or through marriage) but I’m not sure what that would accomplish either — the institution would still exist. They’re doing the same thing all of us are doing — trying to navigate larger systems at large that dictate some of the choices we make even though philosophically we wish to be free spirits and have independence of thought and mind.

        I find criticizing/critiquing them for wanting to marry each other as futile as trying to criticize a woman entering a Miss America pageant since pageants bring in the largest amounts of scholarship money for women. In theory, you can refuse to participate as an individual but it’s not necessarily going to change collectively how the system works.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Sunshine Mama
        Sure you can ask. I am happy to help.
        There are several nice lines for professional women, but it depends on budget and where you work and age. Climate.

        As to the thread.
        Feminism has nothing to do with being married or being single. A homemaker can be just as feminist as a career woman, and the inverse can be true. We are past the 2nd and 3rd wave, and those issues should already be settled.
        It is an evolution, and it is simply accepting that women and men should be equal, and this includes women of all races, religions, and ethnicities, women with disabilities, LGBTQ+, age, size and across the economic spectrum.
        If you believe in it, then you live it. It doesn’t mean you have to be an activist, but it does mean it should underscore daily interactions and choices. It isn’t a destination but an evolution that shifts and changes as the world changes and we confront different issues.
        If this is what she chooses and it makes her happy that is what it is about.
        There is no litmus test and no panel who decides.

    • Veronica says:

      Not a sugar, I’m not sure I’m reading what you are saying correctly. Charles is slimming the monarchy down to 6, yes? That includes Harry and MEghan??? Then I think they all need to get on the stick and do more that 100 events a year, or the BRF is going to lose the support of those people outside of the cities who support them most strongly.

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      If Harry’s truly woke, he’ll be using that apron.

  3. Annabelle Bronstein says:

    I thought this was an excellent appearance for them both. She definitely makes Harry better,

  4. Amy says:

    That picture of her accepting the daffodils from the little girl through the bars is amazing. You can see how engaged she is: crouched down to be on the girl’s level, her face in a very genuine “awwww, you are so cute, I am so honored” smile with the wrinkled forehead. Amazing.

  5. Surely Wolfbeak says:

    She’s really good at this.

  6. If Harry believes in equal rights and access for women then he is a feminist. I’d love for him to vecwoke as well but that is a journey. I believe Meghan will benefit him in that department.

    Her response bugs me and I can’t figure out why…nervous reaction? New relationship twinsies fatigue? Subordination? It could have been a great time to encourage the young lady to keep up the fight or tell her she’s proud of her or look into volunteering? Or I’m off and she just wanted to gush. Anyhoo, nobody yell at me – I love these crazy kids :D

    • Peeking in says:

      They young lady said she’s “glad there’s now a feminist in the Royal Family”, I thought that Megan gave a very diplomatic and appropriate response. If she hadn’t, it would seem like she’s agreeing there aren’t any feminist any, and criticizing the family she’s about to join.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Diplomacy Russian cuz.
      If she had said anything else, then it could have seemed like she was slamming the others, but by pointing out Harry, she gives a compliment to him without the need to name or not name the others.

    • Sunshine mama says:

      Completely my fault. I mistakenly thought the young lady made a general statement about also being a feminis like Meghan. Apologies all around.

    • Veronica says:

      How does giving up your entire life, you entire identity, make you a feminist??? /confused

      • Tina says:

        If you believe in equality between men and women, then you’re a feminist. Meghan gets to choose how her life goes.

      • Sunshine mama says:

        Meghan is making her own choices. If you think she was *only* her career then you are the one placing her identity in a box. Why can’t we stop insisting that feminism is one size fits all? If a woman believes in equality and foregoes marriage and kids until she passes the bar exam she’s a true feminist. If a woman believes in equality and leaves her job at a prestigious law firm to raise a family she is a feminist.

      • Tallyhoo says:

        How is she giving up her entire life and entire identity? Or do you think anytime a woman gets married or changes jobs she is giving up her entire self? That’s a pretty old-fashioned belief. If anything, she has an even bigger platform for many of the issues she has worked on, and will be a more visible role model for young women. I would hope that having a twitter account and a blog are not a woman’s entire identity.

      • Veronica says:

        Can we please not pretend that Meghan is giving up everything and Harry is giving up nothing? Can we be honest here?
        And yes, Meghan has the choice, but does that make her a feminist? She is joining a family and “firm” that will take away her right to speak out about any topic she chooses. She will have to check her voice with the powers that be.
        Here are some things she is giving/has given up:
        Her job
        Her country
        Her social media
        Her citizenship
        Her charities
        Her dog
        Her ability to speak out on whatever she chooses
        Her religion/or at least she is taking up Harry’s
        Her right to walk next to her husband, rather than behind him

        Harry is giving up:


        Would we say a woman who joins a sect that takes away her voice, her freedom, her right to pick her own life is making a feminist choice? I don’t think so.
        But it is an interesting conversation.

      • Tina says:

        All of our choices are informed by the culture we live in, which includes the patriarchy. Meghan has not been coerced in any way into making her choice. You can make anti-feminist choices (many of us do this every day, such as shaving our legs) and still be a feminist.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Maxima, Letizia, Mathilde, etc. All gave up careers to marry their royal husbands. Letizia was named top newscaster under 30 in Spain. Mathilde had her own speech therapy practice. All given up because they moved to a new stage in their lives and a new career as a royal.

        They gave up their careers, homes, countries, language, ability to speak on political topics, personal belongings, ditched “inappropriate” friendships.

        Mary now often speaks with a British upper class accent instead of an Australian one, although she slips into the Aussie one sometimes. She also gave up her religion. Maxima gave up her native language, although maintained her religion (but not the right to raise their kids Catholic; they have to be raised in W-A’s religion). She tried to give up her citizenship, but Argentina doesn’t allow you to do so.

        All of them took on curtsying/bowing and walking behind their spouse, because it is part of the job.

        Are none of them allowed to be considered feminists either? Or any other woman who gets married and changes her career direction as a result? Or does this “argument” only stand for Meghan?

        You keep repeating the same narrow (or a deeply flawed IMO) definition of feminism, and magically only direct your ire at Meghan. Hmmm.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        …but she is ‘giving up’ to gain More – her own office staff, greater influence as HRH – power. At least we should be thankful she Princess Henry Wales will use her grand status to better the less fortunate/ charities with a work ethics.

      • Princessk says:

        Thank you @nota for the clarification but he stressed that there was “a period of time when I – literally didn’t tell anybody at all. And then William was longing to meet her and so was Catherine.” Well I had to make some deductions from this, especially as Meghan said that the first six months of the relationship was very very private, and it does look clear that William was the first to know. Reading into the language Harry used I feel that he was being very protective of the relationship in the early stages and did not want it ‘scuppered’ by family or the public. Having said all that ‘private protection services’ would have known who Harry was dating from day one, information would have been filed and very senior royals may have been aware. So in reality poor Harry can’t really hide anything.😌

        @grace…yes, her medical records. She is now part of the royal firm and will be given every protection possible and that includes the very best medical care with the highest confidentiality.

  7. Whataboutme says:

    Poor Kate! There is no way she can compete with this gorgeous new royal family member! Personality, talent, beautiful, and brains…

    I will miss her on Suits!

  8. Becks says:

    I didn’t say this after the first few appearances, but at this point I want to see her hair done a bit neater – out of her face maybe? I know she probably wears it pulled back to account for the big scarves she loves (which I really like as well, so no complaints there) but I wish it were done a bit neater. I feel bad saying that now because at first I was all “let Meghan be Meghan!” when it comes to her hair.

    I do love that top though. And I find something very authentic about her style. Kate dresses like she thinks a royal should dress. Meghan is trying to dress appropriately, but she is also dressing like a professional woman. We’ve said on here for a while now that part of Kate’s issue is that she never really worked full time, and doesn’t really understand the idea of “professional dress.” She just understands (or tries to) “royal style.” Meghan is dressing like an upscale professional and I like it a lot.

    • Anastasia says:

      I think you hit the nail on the head with the dressing professionally.

    • Talie says:

      I get what you mean…for most women, wearing pants to work is totally a functional decision, but can still be fashionable. I appreciate her not caring about presenting the perfect image.

      I was looking at Kate’s early appearances and, wow, she was perfectly groomed to the hilt! It’s a big change to even how she does things now.

    • RedOnTheHead says:

      Becks, agreed. I noticed in another post that a lot of comments were praising this hairstyle. I like it, I think she’s got the face for it. She’s naturally beautiful and this hairstyle doesn’t detract from that. What I’m confused about it that it looks a little messy for a work event when she’s wearing more streamlined clothes. I think this hairstyle with casual clothing would be great on her. I guess I just don’t understand hair fashion.

      • minx says:

        Agree on the hair. I go back and forth on it.

      • Erinn says:

        YES. This hairstyle while shopping or hanging out with friends or something like that would be perfect. But it looks like she got tired of having her hair down and just tossed it up in an elastic because it was in her way. A super sleek ponytail would have even been preferable at a work event, I think. As long as it’s done in a way that looks polished/on purpose I think she could do a lot of different things with it while maintaining her own styling.

      • inthekitchen says:

        Meghan said on Tig once that her style is to leave one thing “imperfect” otherwise it’s too try-hard and looks obviously try-hard (paraphrasing). So, IMO, her hair is her “imperfect” part of the outfit. Everything else is on point, sleek, neat, well-tailored, etc…except the messy bun. And, even with the bun, it still didn’t fall apart or come down more than the front pieces (intentional), so it’s clearly secured well. I think it’s just the look she is going for – to have some slightly imperfect part of each outfit – as an intentional style choice. I don’t know if that’s the theory of her old friend/stylist Jess Mulroney(sp?) but I feel like Meghan has been doing this for a while – like with the husband shirt half tucked in.

        I also think this was a slightly casual event – sports and the arts and even Harry was just in a sweater – so hair is fine to be slightly casual. I do think she’d have her hair less messy if this were a state dinner or some other more formal event. I’ll be curious to see what she chooses for her wedding and some of the other hat events, like Ascot or Trooping the Color…

        Overall though, I’m really glad she’s wearing her hair UP and changing it up for the different events. I hate that Kate almost always wears her hair down and all in her face, wiglets on parade, etc.

      • Becks says:

        @inthekitchen I can see that. I don’t hate the hair in itself and like I said in other posts I was defending it, I would just like to even see that one part pulled off her face.

        I don’t know why she won’t take fashion/hair advice from me!!! lol.

    • whatever says:

      Your last paragraph doesn’t make any sense. You state that Kate doesn’t understand “professional dress” but understands or tries to understand “royal style” like its a bad thing. To me, there is nothing wrong with that because Kate IS a royal and should dress like….a royal! . The Queen doesn’t dress the same as a normal 91-year-old women, she frequently wears dresscoats in every colour of the rainbow with matching hats nearly everywhere she goes – that’s her Royal style, it’s different from the norm. Kate doesn’t need to dress like an “upscale professional” because she is not the CEO of a company or working in an office/ businesses environment.

      • inthekitchen says:

        I took the OP’s point to mean Kate is inauthentic and not confident in her royal dress, but rather, playing dress-up like what Kate THINKS a royal should dress like. So, instead of knowing herself and her own personal style – and then having that translate into Kate, the royal – she is playing some sort of dress-up role of a “royal.”

        At least that’s how I read it…

      • Becks says:

        Exactly what Inthekitchen said. Kate tries to dress how she thinks a royal should dress, and it often falls flat (this is something frequently discussed on here.) Dressing “like a royal” in itself isn’t a bad thing at all – Kate is the future queen – but something about it is rather inauthentic at times and almost feels like she is playing dress up.

      • Jessica says:

        Authentic ‘royal style’???? Please, the idea of royalty is made-up and there is nothing authentic about it. Some people like Catherine’s style and some people don’t. She’s just not born royal so people can always criticize her as being ‘inauthentic’.

      • notasugarhere says:

        A working upscale professional look is vastly superior to coatdress cosplay IMO. This is a job to be taken seriously, so I appreciate the royals who create logical, professional working wardrobes.

    • Tina says:

      Someone with similar hair to Meghan would have a more informed opinion on this, but it’s my understanding that relaxed hair doesn’t behave like naturally straight hair. To get it looking as sleek as it does for formal events and photos, she needs to use a lot of product which isn’t necessarily great for the hair. I totally understand why she’d want to keep it as it was for every day, especially on a windy day in Cardiff.

      • Hh says:

        That would not be the case with Meghan’s hair. Her natural hair is curly, but not enough to require a relaxer. She could have one, but it would be unnecessary and I don’t know any good stylist that would recommend that severe of a process for her hair. It’s also not thick enough that it needs so much product, (but not thin by any means). Relaxers loosen curl patterns for thick, tightly coiled hair. If one professionally straightens their hair for years (which Meghan has been doing) even once a week, it is very easy to loosen the natural curl pattern. However, the once a week trip is just TONS more money than a relaxer, which is why average woman may go with a relaxer .However, a good wash, blowout, and straighten/press will last a week and look very sleek.

        Meghan does her hair as is because of the metropolitan cultures she’s influenced by. LA, Toronto —and from her Instagram, NYC. In these cities, fashion looks worse when it’s try hard. People don’t like to look “ just so” with everything in place. You look neat, put together, but not “perfect.” The perfection is in looking slightly imperfect. Looking rather low maintenance, but achieving high impact.

        ETA: Her bun at the event prior this looked a lot neater. But I’m not mad if someone looks presentable, but more focused on duties.

      • Valiantly Varnished says:

        Hi there. Girl with relaxed hair here. No we don’t use a ton of product on relaxed hair. It actually weighs the hair down. Most women with relaxed hair use very little product on it other than maybe a serum or oil when blow drying. I also doubt tbat she actually relaxes her hair at all. She has curly hair (probaly 3b or 3c texture) which can be straightened with a blow dryer and flat iron. She doesn’t have 4a-4c hair that would need a chemical relaxer to straighten it.

      • Tina says:

        Ah, ok, thanks! Commenters on another site told me otherwise.

      • LAK says:

        I’ve recently discovered a great hairdresser who has weaned me off the shed load of products i had been indoctrinated into using on my relaxed hair.

        One shampoo and blow dry with her and i went home and threw out all the products in my bathroom.

      • Elaine says:

        I think Meghan commented on this a few years ago, saying she had a Brazilian blow-out? That’s not the same thing as a relaxer, though it is a chemical process.

        I haven’t done it, seen too many horror stories online. But it sees to work for Megsie :-)

      • magnoliarose says:

        I think she is avoiding looking too severe and inaccessible. It can be aging, and neither she nor Harry have that aesthetic. He doesn’t wear suits to these things either.

      • Sunshine mama says:

        Agree. Most afro hair is best without product – whisper light and manageable. In fact a bit of product is required if we want it to have any structure at all. I say most because not all afro hair is the same. My nana’s hair was too baby fine for blow drying let alone relaxing yet I have cousins who can’t have completely straight hair without heat. But yeah, a blow dry with a bit of heat protective serum and off you go :)

    • Maria says:

      Meghan is not royal yet and she probably has a lot more freedom at this point.

    • Merritt says:

      Professional dress is not that simple. The first office job interviews view I had, one of the interviewers was wearing flip flops. And while that may be a more extreme example, it shows how much corporate culture changed from just a few decades earlier when a business suit was the expectation.

    • Keepitreal says:

      Great point! I’m a Brit expat and I work in New York and that is basically how we dress during the winter months: grays, black, navy with a pop of plaid (which I am mad about) or some other color. But her outfit is spot on for work day wear.

    • Veronica says:

      I think an off the shoulder shirt is extremely unprofessional. I am in PR now, I was a teacher for many years, and I was on Wall St, and I would not be allowed to wear that shirt in any of those jobs. Off the shoulder professional?? What profession? Maybe in the arts or advertising, but even there, people never wore off the shoulder shirts.

  9. AmandaPanda says:

    That top is beyond awful. So much for her fashion sense.

    The pic with the daffs and the little girl is gorgeous!

  10. Lucy says:

    I saw a short video on Instagram of Meghan being pulled by the children into a group hug, and she was pretty much struggling to embrace as many of them as she could. It was quite adorable.

    • Kelly says:

      Harry sort of sicced the kids on Meghan by yelling group hug.

      • seesittellsit says:

        Yes, he did suggest that everyone “give Meghan a hug”. I’m sure a minority opinion her, but I thought Harry’s grandstanding here was a bit sick-making, and smelled a little of “playing the crowd”. And that is a perception they should avoid at all costs.

      • Tallyhoo says:

        Eh, it seems like there are some people who call it grandstanding or fake when they do stuff like that, and cold and impersonal if they don’t.

      • Princessk says:

        I am probably quite wrong but I must admit I did wonder if Harry telling the kids to ‘group hug Meghan’ was because he had his eye on a good photo opportunity, which was what exactly happened. I also notice that he then sidestepped out of the camera frame so he did not appear in it. Only a day or two before Kate was spontaneously hugged by a schoolchild and that may have given him an idea. This Meghan Tour around the UK is definitely to raise her profile and popularity and Harry is making sure it happens and why not.

    • Apparently Harry yelled “group hug !” and the kids went for it with gusto. This tells me Harry knows he has a winner, knows her personality thoroughly and is proud of his Megs. I’m loving this!

      • seesittellsit says:

        Yes, and everyone was sure Charles had a winner in Diana and Andrew had a winner in Sarah Ferguson. What Harry is also doing is making sure the whole country sees adorable photos of his, after all, tradition breaking choice, and is reassured that she is sweet, maternal, gets on well with children, and can do the crowd pleasing thing.

      • magnoliarose says:

        It really is a cute thing. I like men who like children. When I started dating my husband, we went on a romantic getaway surprise vacation. He should write a book on the courting process because understands how to behave. He impressed me because he isn’t superficial and he doesn’t play games. There was nothing artificial or contrived about him.
        Anyway, he insisted we pick out some gifts for my now step children, and he talked about them all the time. But what made me fall for him is the fact that he genuinely likes other people’s kids and on our vacation, he made friends with some kids playing tennis. He gave them a lesson in proper serve technique and how to hold their racquets. Mr. Magnolia is an excellent player and played tournaments growing up and was offered scholarships to play for great teams, so he knows his stuff, but he just liked hanging out with them even though they were tiny like six years old or so.

    • Peeking in says:

      At the end of the video he says “she’s mine”, and I’ll admit, I went “awwww”. It’s over at Lainey’s.

    • Liberty says:

      I thought it was charming, too. I think it may define the kind of interactions we will see from them when they do their walkabouts and appearances. Formal? Nods? A little more pulled back? Book William and Kate. Relaxed approachable version, the warmer touch, book Harry and Meghan or, in a lesser way, Charles and Camilla. Though I do think it is possible Kate may start to relax a bit with Meghan in the mix.

    • Liberty says:

      I thought it was adorable too. Her warmth and friendliness was tremendous. She is a natural for this role, in my opinion, and I love that Harry looks simultaneously happy/impish, and sort of dazed to finally be walking this royal path with a capable partner who is ready to jump in and who clearly enjoys people.

  11. Barrett says:

    It’s touching to see he married a woman who has such charisma. She will never be his mom and shouldn’t expected to be. She however makes sense to be his type in personality based on his mothers influence. I wish them much love and happiness.

  12. jeanne says:

    i thought she looked great and did a proper job yesterday but the Daily Mail eviscerated her! they went on and on about how her outfit had too many special meanings and basically how she isn’t demure like kate. i like kate actually but i think there is room for both women.

    i’m american so i like seeing meghan so involved as she was when she was clapping along to the music and dancing, etc. that seemed normal to me. not moving or engaging or just smiling at the little guys would have been odd. i don’t find meghan extra at all, in fact, when i see kate at engagements now i think she is too wooden and could use some pick me up.

    meghan will do a great job i just hope people give her a chance out the gate. i can’t help but think the cards are getting stacked against her.

    • Lorelai says:

      Seriously? Kate does and always has gone way overboard on all of the “special meanings” in her theme dressing and her fans call her brilliant for it. Now all of a sudden they take issue with Meghan wearing Welsh jeans? Those people at the Fail….just awful.

    • MagpieSassyPants says:

      I have actively avoided the fail since January 1st, 2017,but I read that article as well. I was mortified by the overt tone of the article itself, but the comments were mind boggling in how terrible they were. I really feel for Meghan, and for what it is worth, I thought the choices she made to honor to locale they were visiting were lovely.

    • LAK says:

      I guess it depends on where you come from because i didn’t think that article was negative. They often point out the themes in royal dressing, and in this case they were pointing out the messages in MM’s clothing which were perfectly lovely if you believe she put that much thought into them.

      And they align with her perceived values.

      Now if you don’t want that sort of thing pointed out, then you might think it rude that they did.

    • SoulSPA says:

      Most royals have clothes with some meaning for the occasion. “Royal woman *insert title* wears dress with *this pattern/symbol* as a “tribute” of their HRH in their visit to *insert country*”.
      Themed dressing is old. Themed dressing is fun to pick at. Try to guess the underlying message. If it’s not stereotypical and made with good fashion sense plus tradition, it can be meaningful, beautiful and respectful.

    • Guest says:

      The dailymail is such a joke. I always see which sight can go on the attack faster when it comes to meghan the daily mail or royal dish. Yesterday was a tie, lol.

    • magnoliarose says:

      The Daily Mail is good for pictures, but it is a tabloid. Nothing more and even here when it is talked about it is with a massive eye roll.
      Also please understand some comments are paid trolls, and some are just trolls and some just a-holes with a crappy life.
      They aren’t the voice of a majority.

  13. Talie says:

    I watched the videos…she was fab! She really knows how to work a crowd — this is definitely her beat. She seems to clam up when things get official, like the Christmas gathering.

  14. Anna nuttall says:

    I feel a little protective of Meghan, I’m hating all the trolls surrounding her due to her being an actress, half black and divorcees. So what! So far she been very classy and engaging with the crowds on a visit. Go, Meghan. I really hope the trolls will STHU on their wedding day.

  15. Beluga says:

    One thing that I’ve always liked about Harry is how engaged he is with everyone he meets and seems like he really cares about them and I’m so glad he’s found a partner who’s the same way. Yesterday’s visit was a tick in so many boxes. The moment where Meghan peeled away to comfort the little girl who was too nervous to perform was darling.

  16. Brunswickstoval says:

    Throwing the spotlight on them makes me appreciate how boring this “job” must be. Don’t get me wrong all jobs can have boring parts but this seems so incredibly dull and repetitive. I wonder if once they settle in she’ll get bored of it all.

    • Tina says:

      I’m hoping she’ll find an activist niche. For all that Diana was manipulative, she did a lot of good work on AIDS and land mines.

      • Brunswickstoval says:

        Yes but a lot of Diana’s activism came after she divorced. My impression was it wasn’t liked by the queen as she became more popular.

        Anyway just my 2c the meet and greets etc would drive me spare.

      • Tina says:

        A lot of the land mine stuff was after she divorced, but the AIDS work was in the 1980s when they were still married. The Queen didn’t like how much attention Diana drew, but that wasn’t necessarily because of her activist work. Diana drew attention for all sorts of reasons.

    • inthekitchen says:

      I don’t feel like it would be boring at all. Okay, granted parts might be boring, like the 3-day long weird Christmas celebrations or whatever, but it seems like you can make as much out of the job as you want. You could have an expert from any field that you want at your figertips, can partner with (almost) any organization or cause that you want, can travel and see amazing sights and meet amazing people, and you’d have the chance to make a difference in the lives of people (or animals, or education, or communities, etc.). I feel like the job would only be as boring as you allow it to be. For someone as incurious as William, I can see how he’d view his life as boring…but he hardly even works anyway! He’s got plenty of time to spend with his family or skiing and dad-dancing with young women without his family.

      I mean, even with the more mundane engagements like when Kate was at Fortnum & Mason and asked “can you test the smell by smelling it” you could still have a blast. You get to be greeted by people who are over the moon to meet you, they’ll give you personal lessons on tea and a tour of Fortnum & Mason, and you get to learn new and interesting things about tea or British foods (and then get to taste said tea or foods). I feel like if you spent time preparing – like Meghan seemed to have done before the Brixton radio visit where she told the show host how amazing her show was (so clearly had listened to the show prior) – you would learn so much interesting stuff. I love learning new things even if they don’t relate to my job or profession so I think it would be amazing to be in a role like that. Not to mention all of the other trade-offs like amazing health care for life, financial security for you and the next X generations of your descendants, the opportunity to travel the world, wear insane jewels, and meet smart and interesting people.

  17. SM says:

    I wonder how will feminist (among the significant other of the royal family) will actualy fly with the royals. Because I have a feeling she will have to adjust her feminist quite a bit now.

  18. Cher says:

    Look, M dressed appropriately for the occasion. She wasn’t wearing a dress and bending over showing her…. In other photos M and H sat on the floor against a the wall and watched the kids break dancing, a coat dress with an abundance of buttons and overly coifed hair would not have been necessary.

  19. Other Renee says:

    The outfit is cute but her hair is a mess.

  20. Nene says:

    Woke? This is the same guy who wore a swastika. I don’t get the fawning over him especially considering that other people would be (rightfully) crucified (not literally) for doing something similar

    Does the British royalty thing make him forgivable?

    • inthekitchen says:

      So, people aren’t allowed to grow up or change or learn from their mistakes? Does a few stupid choices more than a decade ago make someone – even a royal – unforgivable? Maybe he’s ashamed of some of his choices in the past and so now has learned more about or cares more about equality and social justice. I believe that (most) people can change and he’s showing – in his choice of a partner – that he has changed and grown.

      • Nene says:

        Maybe because Ive grown up in South Africa where apartheid proponents hide behind the “rainbow nation” facade … i don’t believe adults really change. (He was in his twenties when it happened).

        I’d think as a member of the British royal family, he would be raised to be more aware of cultural sensitivities?

      • inthekitchen says:

        That’s really sad, Nene (believing that adults don’t change). Although maybe I am naive.

        I’m a therapist and believe in the ability of almost anyone to be able to change, if they choose to (and put in the work and examine themselves, etc.). Now, whether they choose to is a different story.

        I do believe Harry has changed in some ways, partly because he said he went to therapy and (sounded like) worked out some/most of his issues.

      • Veronica says:

        No, not really, people don’t forget things like that, but if you like Harry, you forgive him for anything. . It’s like tribalism, like American politics. Harry can do no wrong to a lot of people. He wasn’t a child, he was 22. My daughter’s age. I cannot imagine the consequences to most people being seen wearing what he wore on social media!!
        But again…tribalism. And I don’t think some therapy for the loss of his mom would alleviate the racism inherent in his choice of that “costume.”
        And I know, the excuses are on their way.

    • Tina says:

      It was a really dumb thing to do. But he wasn’t wearing it from a supportive perspective. In British culture we make fun of Nazis. They’re a joke. It’s less funny from the perspective of 2018, when actual Nazis like Gorka are being taken seriously again. But for many years we had TV programmes like ‘Allo Allo. And Harry learned, and grew, and changed.

    • magnoliarose says:

      People change and they make mistakes. We can’t go through life believing it isn’t a possibility.

      The song Amazing Grace was written by a man who profited from slavery and then woke up to the atrocity of the slave trade. Sometimes people who were once in the wrong make the best voices for change as examples of the possibility. They often get it better than people who never were on the very wrong side of an issue.
      He was on a Nazi march and he wasn’t bombing Jewish Community Centers so it needs to be put in perspective. Save it for the real Nazis who have allowed over a thousand people to die in Puerto Rico and are denying DACA kids their rights.
      I have thrown aside all other activism for this issue and when you see the pain and fear in their eyes, you won’t look at some silly costume from a party several years ago with no power behind it and give it any signifigance.

      • Veronica says:

        You are seriously making excuses for Harry? It was ok because he wasn’t on a Nazi march, and he wasn’t bombing community centers? Really?? No, I’m sorry. Wearing a Nazi uniform isn’t funny. Wearing a Nazi uniform when you are a Prince gives it a nod. Wearing a Nazi uniform is never excusable.
        A silly costume?? I am pretty outraged by your excuses, I have to be honest here.

      • Tina says:

        Enjoy your outrage. Magnoliarose has more reason than most here to object to Nazi regalia, and her sense of perspective is entirely appropriate.

      • GreenTurtle says:

        Well said, Magnoliarose and Tina. We talk a lot about social justice here, but also are quick to rip people to shreds for being imperfect allies or just imperfect in general. Advocacy without empathy and forgiveness can become an ugly affair.

      • Veronica says:

        Tina, you have no idea if I have as much reason to be outraged as Magnolia. And just because she isn’t outraged, that doesn’t mean others don’t have the right to be.
        You know, I am not going to respond to you anymore. There are some serious Meghan sugars here, obsessed with her, while being horrible to Kate, which I think you generally are, and no minds will be changed, so I’m wasting my time. Time will tell if Meghan, a cable actress who did a few charitable events, will completely turn the BRF around into an accessible and modern institution that so many of you are convinced she will do. I think you are putting way too many expectations on a pretty ordinary human being.
        But the idolatry of Meghan coupled with the viciousness toward Kate is pretty hypocritical in my view. Me, I think they are all lazy and entitled.
        Have a good weekend.

      • Tina says:

        Veronica, my criticism of Kate is always fact-based and work-focussed. Meghan is simply too new on the scene for any such criticism to apply to her. But to claim that she is “giving up her entire life” and “isn’t a feminist” are, in my view, just as harsh as anything melted out to Kate here. And with much less justification (and “a cable actress who did a few charity events” is an incredibly telling description). I have no expectation that Meghan will “completely turn the BRF around”. But similarly I’m not prepared to condemn her yet either. It’s my country and my royal family and I keep the discussion to the arguments rather than calling people “sugars” or otherwise. You have a good weekend too.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Meghan is too new to warrant harsh criticism and I find most the things thrown at her to be just made up reasons to dislike her.
        I had criticism for Kate long before Meghan came on the scene and my reasons are based on what she does and how she behaves. At any time she can change, and I am here for it because I believe in the ability to change and grow.

        You dislike Meghan for having a career when most struggling actors would give anything for seven years on any show. To get work at all is very difficult. Kate never held a job, but that is better or ???

        As for Nazis. He isn’t a Nazi. I save my outrage for real ones and not a stupid stunt by a spoiled Prince many years ago. Like I said people change. We should want people to change when they are wrong without saddling them with their mistakes for life.

        It isn’t a contest. My like of Meghan has zero to do with Kate. They are two different women, and neither are close personal friends, so I don’t need to pick an imaginary side.

  21. HoustonGrl says:

    Already politicizing the royal family I see. This won’t end well.

    • Tina says:

      Being a feminist is not as political in the UK as it appears to be in the US.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        Feminism is a political issue, in the UK and especially abroad. She needs to learn that she can’t drop political leanings in casual conversation, this will be a HUGE and difficult part of her job. It’s called self control. I’m a die hard feminist but it’s not the role of the royal family, as unelected officials, to comment on any political issue, it’s a constitutional monarchy. Out of respect for that designation, they ought to remain neutral. What role does feminism play in an event for school children? She’s brought it up twice now.

      • Tina says:

        Equal rights for women (which is what feminism is) is not a controversial subject here. Camilla has done significant work on domestic violence and FGM and has been publicly praised as a feminist.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        Addressing equal pay and domestic violence, for example, are non-political ways of speaking about women’s rights. But feminism with no context (like her last two visits) is a politically weighted measure. As far as I know, Camilla doesn’t casually drop the word.

      • Tina says:

        Camilla is of a different generation. Similarly, I’m sure the Queen would not describe herself as a feminist, even though many of her actions have been feminist in nature (such as driving the Saudi king around her estate at top speed). Even the Daily Mail commenters, who hate Meghan, haven’t criticised her for being political by calling herself a feminist. I’m far more concerned by Charles regularly writing to Parliament. That is a violation of our constitutional norms, not Meghan calling herself something that is widely and broadly accepted in this country by all major political parties.

      • Jessica says:


        Please stop; by that measure advocating for domestic violence or the NHS is a political issue. There is nothing wrong with feminism and shouldn’t be looked at as divisive.

      • Nic919 says:

        By making the use of the word feminist political we let the true anti feminists win. Once something is political, then many start to shy away from its use because they want to be neutral. Already there is a younger generation of women who don’t call themselves feminists but believe in all the rights feminists have obtained for them.

    • inthekitchen says:

      I just really don’t get this argument that using the word “feminist” is equal to making a political statement or is equal to someone trying to be controversial. What difference does it make if you use that word when your deeds show you’re a feminist. Several people wrote about QEII’s statement about women or Camilla’s support of different causes – why is that okay but using the word feminist means Meghan’s trying to be political?

      Why is it political to clearly state that you (and your future husband) support equality for women? That almost seems like the least political thing a person could believe – men and women should be treated equally. How could someone argue against that?!

    • magnoliarose says:

      That is a reach. That is like Charles being for sustainable farming and green initiatives. In this, the UK is far ahead of Americans and our nonsensical politicizing of social issues that aren’t. Well, most countries are ahead in those categories.

  22. ha says:

    Prince Harry Champions Women’s Rights During Impassioned Speech in Nepal

  23. Sage says:

    I like the top and I could see myself wearing it.
    Harry’s hair…😞

  24. homeslice says:

    I don’t care for her clothes, but she looks genuinely happy to be out and about, meeting and greeting. Hope it continues!

  25. Jayna says:

    Her hair is a mess. Her outfit is cute. They look like they had a good time. Harry is proud of her. I’ve always had a soft spot for Harry.

  26. Gigi LaMoore says:

    I think there is a lot of confusion as to what feminism is. To me, it’s about choice. As long as a woman is actively choosing to be a stay at home mom, to be a lawyer, CEO, ditch digger, to shut down her social media accounts, etc., and is not being coerced into doing so, they are a feminist to me. Sorry, too long and poor sentence structure. LOL

    • CynicalAnn says:

      Choice, and equal pay for equal work. That’s my basic definition.

    • Veronica says:

      So if a woman chooses to subjugate her life, her voice, her freedom to a man (not saying Meghan is doing that) she is a feminist? I don’t see it.
      If a woman chooses to give up her identity, her freedoms, her entire life to marry a rich guy, is that feminist? (again, not saying Meghan did this) I still don’t see it.

      • Tina says:

        You don’t believe in choice feminism. That’s fine. Many of the rest of us do.

      • Gigi LaMoore says:

        @Veronica-You might see it as subjugation. She doesn’t. Look, I have been an independent career woman all my life. I call the shots in my work life and personal life. If i were ever to meet the man who is “the one” (not sure if there is a such thing), would I make some different choices, such as getting out of the rat race and doing something that feeds my soul? You bet your sweet patootie. At 46, Superwoman is tired. The end.

      • Veronica says:

        I don’t think making the choice to do all that a man tells me to do, to give up my independence and my voice, my life, is a feminist choice. And I have been a feminist since before most people on this board were born, so I am pretty darn comfortable with my definition of feminism.
        And you think Meghan is marrying Harry for security and money because she is tired? Interesting perspective.

      • Gigi LaMoore says:

        @Veronica-I think you just like to argue. I also think that you are not comprehending what people are trying to explain to you.

      • notasugarhere says:

        To repeat.

        Maxima, Letizia, Mathilde, etc. All gave up careers to marry their royal husbands. Letizia was named top newscaster under 30 in Spain. Mathilde had her own speech therapy practice. All given up because they moved to a new stage in their lives and a new career as a royal.

        They gave up their careers, homes, countries, language, ability to speak on political topics, personal belongings, ditched “inappropriate” friendships.

        Mary now often speaks with a British upper class accent instead of an Australian one, although she slips into the Aussie one sometimes. She also gave up her religion. Maxima gave up her native language, although maintained her religion (but not the right to raise their kids Catholic; they have to be raised in W-A’s religion). She tried to give up her citizenship, but Argentina doesn’t allow you to do so.

        All of them took on curtsying/bowing and walking behind their spouse, because it is part of the job.

        Are none of them allowed to be considered feminists either? Or any other woman who gets married and changes her career direction as a result? Or does this “argument” only stand for Meghan?

        You keep repeating the same narrow (or a deeply flawed IMO) definition of feminism, and magically how only direct your ire at Meghan. Hmmm.

  27. anon says:

    what, no shade on her new british accent? she’s not the first feminist in the world or in the british family. what’s rarer is someone who is educated and isn’t a feminist.

  28. Ravine says:

    Meghan is on the record as loving cooking, so an apron makes perfect sense as a gift.

  29. Steph_in_Toronto says:

    I hope no one is naive enough to think that Harry choosing a bride that is an American d-list actress that is divorced and also biracial was not discussed at great length by the Royals. I truly believe that Harry had to go to bat for his choice of partner, and I am sure his arguments were taken to heart by the Queen who clearly favours him and understands what Meghan can bring to the total family in terms of perception. Her acceptance was based on love for Harry yes, but also with a clear understanding of the failings and future of the Firm. That said, Meghan is doing a lovely job of it so far and will have to endure much criticism, but a love match with a woman that clearly is ready and willing to learn the ropes and is retaining her own personhood as best she can is a win win in my books.

    • Princessk says:

      I think you have a point. Harry admitted that he did not tell his family about Meghan until six months into the relationship when William persuaded him to introduce her to the family. For sure Harry was worried about how a divorced older actress would go down with his family but I do believe that he was prepared to stand firm no matter what. Also a royal commentator, who is also an insider and usually very measured in his comments actually exclaimed, in a response to a question about the shortness of the courtship, “Well Harry is madly in love!!”.
      That simple sentence said it all. I cannot remember any other senior royal being described as “madly in love”, except perhaps the Queen. I think that the Palace knew that Harry had found his heart’s desire and that was that.

      Meghan was then fast tracked into the royal system and the many many things to make this happen were put into action such as when and where the marriage will take place, where there permanent London and country residences will be, their future titles, titles of future children, the amount of increase to Harry’s allowance, Meghan’s clothing allowance upon marriage, the charities they will take over, Meghan’s marriage visa, Princess lessons, new staff to support the couple, Meghan’s medical records etc. I am sure this is just the tip of the iceberg and I am sure that Meghan’s diary is bursting to the seams in terms of attending to the implications of all of these things, quite aside from going on public engagements.

      Meghan prepares well for things, she gives the impression of being meticulous. After she left the radio station the young people were very impressed that she already knew who each of them were and what they were doing from the type of questions she asked.

      • notasugarhere says:

        PrincessK where did you read that? I’ve personally seen nothing like that from Harry about keeping her from the family or being worried about reaction.

        H+M talked about being private (as in we the public were unaware of them) for months, but not being private/away from family. They talked in the engagement interview that she’s been meeting with different members of the family “over the past year and a half”, with Harry emphasizing the planning he did to make sure she spent time with plenty of his family during the times she was in the UK.

      • Princessk says:

        @nota…..Harry said it I believe during the engagement interview that he did not tell anyone in the family about Meghan for the first six months they were dating. I know he definitely said it and that William was the first he told and William asked to meet her.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I have just re-read the engagement interview and he said nothing of the sort, about not telling anyone in the family for six months. He says “It was exciting I mean I’ve – you know I’d been seeing her for a period of time when I – literally didn’t tell anybody at all.”

        That could mean family, or friends, or staff and could be any length, but certainly wasn’t 6 months. They admitted she’d been meeting with his family for a year and a half. Nor anything definitive about William being the first one told, the one to persuade him to introduce her to family, etc..

        What we learned in Nov 2016 (when his statement came out) was that he had already told the staff by late August / early September 2016 about the two of them seeing each other. He wouldn’t have told the staff and not told his family.

        This is from the engagement interview transcript –

        Int: What was it like introducing Meghan to your father and your brother?

        Prince Harry: What was it like? It was exciting I mean I’ve – you know I’d been seeing her for a period of time when I – literally didn’t tell anybody at all. And then William was longing to meet her and so was Catherine. So, you know, being our neighbors we managed to get that in a couple of – well quite a few times now and Catherine has been absolutely …

        Meghan Markle: She’s been wonderful.

        Prince Harry: … amazing, as has William as well, you know, fantastic support. And then my – my father as well, we had a couple of – no more than that …

        Meghan Markle: We’ve had …

        Prince Harry: … A handful of teas and meetings and all sorts of gatherings over at his place as well. So, no, the family together have been absolutely, you know, a solid support and my grandparents as well have been – have been wonderful throughout this whole process and they’ve known for quite some time. So how they – how they haven’t told anybody is – is again a miracle in itself. But now the whole family have come together and have been a huge amount of support.

        Meghan Markle: They’ve been amazing.

  30. perplexed says:

    I can believe he believes in equality between men and women.

    Whether he always behaves as a gentleman is a different story. I think you can probably be a jerk and a feminist at the same time, male or female. Susan Sarandon is a feminist. She’s also kind of a jerk. But it’s not like the two are incompatible with each other. (I”m not saying definitively that Harry is a jerk — it’s just that if stories came out about him being less than gentlemanly, I wouldn’t be surprised, because most famous people wind up disappointing you in some way).

    But since he’s grown up with the idea of a female head of state in the form of his grandmother, and Britain is not averse to having female Prime Ministers, I don’t think it’s impossible he could be a feminist. The concept of having a female leader in Britain isn’t really odd at all, and he’s probably used to the idea because of that. He also admires his mother who decided to take on one of the most rigid institutions of all time and probably became a feminist of some sorts later in life. So, yeah, I can believe he’s a feminist, even if it was mentioned for good PR (I don’t think those two concepts are incompatible either).

  31. Pandy says:

    You know, she will always have to make sure the conversation rolls back around to the “real” Royal. Hence the Harry is a feminist too …

    • Tina says:

      It was actually a very clever response. If she had simply said, “Thank you,” the implication would be that she agreed that she was the first feminist in the royal family. If she had said, “oh, I’m not the first one,” that invites a follow-up about who the others were. She could have said “there are lots of feminists in the royal family” but then she’s presuming to speak for them. By saying “he’s a feminist too” she responds without speaking for anyone else but Harry and provides no implications about the rest of the royals, which is not her place to do.

  32. cd3 says:

    I’m consistently blown away by how beautiful she is.
    Love the top, don’t mind the hair… maybe it was windy?!

  33. Enough Already says:

    No one can say Meghan isn’t sparking some interesting conversations lol.