Meghan Markle: LGBTQ issues are ‘a basic human rights issue, not one about sexuality’


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a reception for delegates from the Commonwealth Youth Forum at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre, London

Now that I’m getting a better look at Meghan Markle’s outfit at the Commonwealth Youth Forum, I actually have to take back some of my kinder assessments. No, this Altuzarra dress doesn’t even work without the blazer. The shoes are wrong. The crossbody bag doesn’t work with the dress or the event. It’s almost like Meghan kept going back and forth between wanting to look hip/youthful and wanting to look summery and wanting to look professional, so she threw a bunch of sh-t together and it looked terrible. And I’m sorry, this dress needs to be burned. The buttons, the pinstripes, the belt, the cut of it – it’s all bad. Really bad. But at least she spoke up in very clear terms about human rights and LGBTQ rights:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may not be married quite yet, but they’ve already found causes they’re both passionate about supporting. On Wednesday, the couple reaffirmed their commitment to LGBTQ issues during a meeting with delegates of the Commonwealth Youth Forum. Speaking to Australian Jacob Thomas, who won a Queen’s Young Leaders award for helping to reduce the suicide rate within the LBGTQ community in Australia, Meghan expressed her support.

“Miss Markle said, and these were her exact words, ‘This is a basic human rights issue, not one about sexuality,’ ” Thomas told reporters. Harry echoed his fiancée’s statement, saying that he was invigorated by the progress that has been made in the past decade on gay rights.

“Prince Harry said that what was so amazing was that 10 or so years ago, we wouldn’t have been having this conversation and how incredible it was that we now were,” Thomas added.

Harry and Meghan both told Thomas that they planned to prioritize working with the LGBTQ community following their wedding, as the two begin to really dive into various charitable pursuits.

“Both Prince Harry and Miss Markle said they would put LGBT issues at the front of their work,” Jonah Chinga, an LGBTQ activist from Kenya, told reporters.

[From People]

Stage-whisper: I hope a really smart gay stylist takes over for Jessica Mulroney because Meghan needs better help than this f–king outfit. Regular voice: it might seem like an obvious issue to support in 2018, but think about how little LGBTQ activism the British royal family has actually been involved with over the years. Diana was the only one who truly embraced the gay community (and they embraced her right back). That’s not to say that the royals didn’t quietly support gay rights – many of them did. But they never did much verbally or physically to show their support. So yes, I hope Meghan and Harry become the new royal ambassadors to the LGBTQ community. Why not?

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a reception for delegates from the Commonwealth Youth Forum at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre, London

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a reception for delegates from the Commonwealth Youth Forum at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre, London

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News.

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

138 Responses to “Meghan Markle: LGBTQ issues are ‘a basic human rights issue, not one about sexuality’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Ivaninha says:

    I actually really like this outfit. :/

  2. Citresse says:

    I don’t know, it looks like MM is dressed for a cruise ship or a backyard BBQ. The shoes accentuate her thinning legs….. maybe MM is losing weight before her wedding??? Anyway, a nice tailored look is best on MM….these bulky, buttony sundresses don’t work on MM or anyone else.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      Her legs have always been teeny-tiny. I don’t think she is losing weight.

    • Ellie says:

      Her legs are tiny, which is one reason the dress makes her look SO boxy when she is really a tiny human all over. I’m not sure about it for the occasion, but I think I’d like it if it didn’t fit so terribly.

    • Milla says:

      This is Kate bowsorth dress. I can see her wearing it.

      Markle needs time to find her style, that’s normal. Different role, different country, different level of media coverage…

      I love that they support lgbtq community. Homophobia is still insanely high. It is so Diana of them, to support the community.

    • Danielle says:

      She has lost a lot of weight, hasn’t she? I really noticed it a few weeks ago, but it’s her legs that really show it. I always thought that she had a fabulous figure in Suits.

    • Honey says:

      3 things: she has tiny legs without much calf muscle definition or
      “contouring”; she looks like she has lost weight; and she sort of has a boxy rectangular shape.

      4. Spot on re: dressed for a BBQ. She’s dressed way to casual IMO. She could have or should have worn a nice sleeveless sheath dress if she wanted to be summer or springlike—and rocked the same jacket and shoes. She’s trying too hard to be trendy.

      Ok. 4 things.

    • Veronica T says:

      It is summery, and too informal for this event. This was a professional
      Event and she looks like she is going to a picnic. And it’s Sloppy with those flapping straps in the back. I liked the dress the other woman’s wearing with the yellow stripe. A skirt, blouse, jacket like Letizia wears is appropriate for anything.
      And good for them for speaking out about LGBTQ issues! Bravo on that!

  3. Beth says:

    I didn’t see the whole dress yesterday, now I clearly see that’s not a good look. It looks more like a summer dress, not something I’d wear in April. Maybe if the buttons were a lighter color and it was fitted without the belt it might not be so bad. Kate wears lots of buttons, and it looks like Meghan likes her ill-fitting coats and now dresses that have big belts.

  4. Aang says:

    I’m the parent of a trans child and any positive attention is desperately needed. I honestly thought my child might not live. Now that he can be himself he is thriving. I never want any other child or any other family to suffer the way we did. We need to let lgbtq kids now they are not alone, they can be themselves, and society will accept them. It will save lives. I’m not a big royal fan but I may become one.

    • Snazzy says:

      I’m so sorry you and your child went through this and that he is now thriving and happy. Sending hugs

    • Addie says:

      I’m so glad that your child is thriving. That’s wonderful for all of you. A few months ago we had a plebiscite in Australia regarding allowing same sex marriage here. The proposal was passed by a clear majority, even though there was a filthy campaign against legalising same sex marriage. For all the talk about people being apathetic and not caring about anything but themselves, the results proved that theory dead wrong. Most people had a friend, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, mother, father, etc who had to remain hidden as to their sexuality or pretend to be something else out of fear. That empathy and the knowledge that their friend, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, mother, father etc deserved to be seen and heard and loved saw the law changed. There is hope.

      I have to also say that the campaign was run by all sorts of people, some high profile but mostly just everyday folk. Let’s be real here and know that the royals may be interested (and that’s fine) but it’s the everyday people who turn out to do the hard yards every day who are the real heroes here.

    • aang says:

      Thanks ^^^. Glad to hear Australia is progressing too.

  5. Lindy says:

    Yesssss kaiser this whole look needs to be burned not just the dress. Meghan needs to start speed dialling her red carpet Suits stylists.

  6. Maddy says:

    Agreed with you that the dress doesn’t look as good in this angle as the photo from yesterday. It is actually very hot in London this week though! 25C (which I think is about 80F)?

  7. Vava says:

    This dress would look better without the black buttons. The crossbody doesn’t work with it, either. I think if the buttons where removed and then replaced with say a covered button in the same fabric or a cream colored button the dress would be good! I don’t mind the shoes with it.

  8. susiecue says:

    I’m trying to figure out what’s up with Harry’s legs in the top photo. He was probably mid-walk, but it looks really funky in the pic

  9. cath says:

    TBH I don’t get the negativity I’ve been reading about Jessica Mulroney and her styling. If she wasn’t perceived to be good at what she does, why does she keep getting gigs – like the Wedding Vacations one recently – and favourable commentary and support from the media (constantly is asked back on Cityline). I checked out her IG and whenever she posts, people are all over her with praise and ask for details on what she’s wearing.

    Not a fan – just trying to figure it out…

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Toronto people, we need your help!

      • mazzie says:

        Torontonian here. Connections. She’s married to the son of a former PM and friends with another. Plus Toronto likes to create celebrities out of people who really aren’t.

      • LAB says:

        I’m from the Prairies, and I can’t get the Jessica Mulroney love either; I think @mazzie nailed it though.

      • still_sarah says:

        Brian Mulroney was seen as being very corrupt when he was Prime Minister. A book about him was titled “On The Take”. The family is/was seen as people who would take advantage of every benefit their social standing could get them with not much concern for anyone else. No one ever said “Wow, what great humanitarians!” as the whole family always seemed detached from anything except social climbing and benefitting from being rich and being around rich people. Jessica Mulroney came from a rich family and married one of the prime minister’s sons who I believe is seen as having built his “entertainment” career by virtue of his famous family name, She may be a great person but the Mulroneys are not much loved in Canada.

    • Redgrl says:

      From Canada – not Toronto, but lived there briefly & routinely go to visit friends – but my best guess is Jessica Mulroney’ (formerly Brownstein, daughter of the Browns’s shoe empire, I believe, and daughter-in-law of former Prime Minister and wife of Ben Mulroney, presenter on cheesy Toronto entertainment show) has a client base and good PR as a result of daddy, hubby and daddy-in-law being well connected in some circles in Toronto and it’s all a big Emperor With No Clothes among people who either want entry to those circles or those who don’t want to offend her.

      • gina in t,o. says:

        Those connections got her started for sure, but somehow she’s managed to keep people interested in her. Can’t figure that one out myself. A lot of those insta followers are A-list names (as A-list as you can get in T.O. anyway).

        I’ve noticed too that she seems to have become more “hollywood” over the years – i.e. obvious implants, hair extensions and lip injections – and more of an attention seeker. Ironically, the Hollywood star Megan seems more real and down to earth lol.

    • Milla says:

      She’s well connected. But as a stylist she isn’t good. This is not mm the actress anymore, this is member of the royal family. You have to put trends aside and go for more suitable look keeping in mind what Markle would feel good in

  10. Lala says:

    I get where she’s going with this look…I’ve ALWAYS loved the feminine deconstruction of the wonderful suits men wore back in the 30′s-40s…and I love the unexpected hint of skin…but MOST OF ALL…I love that she is saying what EVERYONE should be saying about LGBTQ issues…that its NOT about sexuality…it’s about BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS!!! I TOTALLY, HONESTLY LOVE THAT!

  11. dodgy says:

    Considering a lot of the Commonwealth still have Sodomy laws on their books, this a big (and welcome) statement.

    • Addie says:

      Agreed, but what will Harry and Meghan actually DO in those jurisdictions? Their role is strictty apolitical. Sure, they can advocate generally but will they be perceived as meddling in another country’s laws? It’s a genuine question: where does support move into meddling with legally elected governments and their laws? Will those they support come under greater focus/punishment?

      It’s a whole different ball game than the Heads Together thing where the trio could parrot a few phrases and have compliant local charities do all the work while having to say how great the royals are.

      • Elaine says:

        Good question. The Monarchy is supposed to be A-Political and anodyne. Coming up against laws (however unjust) in democratically elected countries is the opposite of that. This seems like immovable object meets opposing force.

        Fingers crossed they might actually do some real good.

      • A says:

        Hello, from a Commonwealth country here–those sodomy laws were holdovers from British imperialism, not laws that were created in democratically elected countries. The fact that these same countries now have to undertake the effort of repealing those laws when many of them never asked for them in the first place is shameful. This is hardly political–it’s basic human decency and the least of what they could do.

      • Addie says:

        @A:
        For sure, there are laws from the remnants of colonialism. And while attitudes to sexuality move to the human rights sphere, existing laws can only be changed via the political process IF there is a political will to do so from progressive political leaders and voters themselves. Again, the BRF in the form of Harry and Meghan cannot interfere in another country’s laws. They can talk and wring their hands but what else? And why are their voices more authentic than others’ voices, more worthy of being heeded? Genuine questions.

        Our recent change of laws here to allow same sex marriage would never have been won if the current conservative government had held sway. It was the groundswell of voters that enacted change, brought to action by their fellow citizens. A bottom up approach, not a top down as per the BRF approach. I find this idea of cementing BRF members into roles that should be open on the basis of merit just appalling. It comes across as British Empire 2.0.

  12. Redgrl says:

    Now that I see the dress without the blazer I retract my benefit of the doubt comment from yesterday. That dress is hideous and that slit in the front from the buttons is going to result in major flashing when she sits down (as someone who unknowingly bought a suit with a front slit once and therefore knows what will happen!)

  13. Shotcaller says:

    Her outfits are chic/career oriented but the shoes always scream cocktail hour or date night.

  14. Becks says:

    I’m glad to see them speaking out on this. Aside from the obvious – that gay rights are still a huge issue, etc – if you are supporting mental health in young people and mental health in general via Heads Together, you can’t ignore LGBTQ as a mental health issue (meaning suicide rates, depression, etc, NOT THAT IT IS A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE IN ITSELF.)

    That said, I’m with you Kaiser. the more I see of this outfit the less I like it.

  15. Cee says:

    I don’t believe being quietly supportive of human rights is enough in 2018. You truly support something, be that a movement or person? Be vocal. Be outspoken. Do something. Particularly if you have a platform.

  16. Peacee says:

    The Common Wealth is a social club where heads of state meet to network and nothing more. As a former British colony, my country folks have no idea what the common wealth does or what it stands for or what we benefit from it. We don’t even take the common wealth games seriously.
    It’s the British that’s taking the Common Wealth seriously. As Africans, we have the ECOWAS, and the African Union and most of the countries in Africa do business with China, the EU and Middle Eastern countries.
    We have no idea how Common Wealth member countries benefit economically from that body and have no idea what the common wealth does. It’s a pity Britain is trying too hard to still remain relevant by clinging to the common wealth after it left the EU.

    • MRsBump says:

      100+!
      As a fellow african, i tried explaining this in a previous thread, and got berated by an english poster who insisted upon the importance of the CW.
      For years the CW was dying a slow death, all this flurry of activity is very recent and can be directly linked to Brexit. Now that they are out of the EU, Britain wants to revive the CW and leverage whatever influence it still has to create better deals for itself.
      Make no mistake this is not about Britain helping other CW countries in a mutually beneficial partnership, this about Britain helping itself first, and the others will feed off whatever crumbs are left. I wouldn’t mind this, was it not for the PR campaign they are rolling out, extolling the virtues of Britain’s largesse towards us, the poorer members.
      However this is too little too late, after years of ignoring the CW, the vacuum left behind, at least in Africa, has been filled by India and China, who, to their credit, dont mask their intentions behind glossy PR friendly charitable deeds.

      • LAK says:

        I object to China’s involvement in Africa, but that’s another discussion not suited to a gossip blog.

      • A says:

        @LAK, with all due respect, if you’re not from the countries in Africa that China is involved in, I would advise you to prioritize the voices of the people who are. More so if those nations were former British colonies.

        But yes, I agree. I followed the Commonwealth games because I want to cheer for my athletes. But it’s not a priority for many many countries and it’s funny / puzzling to see the British suddenly go all out on this stuff. Funny, puzzling, and mildly infuriating.

      • MRsBump says:

        China’s involvement in Africa is what we make of it. Till now it has been a very one sided relationship to our detriment. We should, however accept that our governments must shoulder a large part of the blame. Instead of playing China against the other habitual vultures namely the US, and the EU, we sold off mining shares in exchange for ego driven, unnecessary buildings to glorify the ruling party. It is mostly the African elites who have benefited from the money received from the Chinese.
        Yet despite all this, the Sino-African relationship is a more “honest” one, unapologetically cash and interest driven and without the patronising arrogance of the US/UK/Eu, who interfere in our governments, steal our ressources while pretending to give us aid.
        I feel the same about celebrities who come over here for their annual dose of poverty porn. I’d much rather see them helping the poor black kids in their own countries, but that wouldn’t be instagram friendly now, would it?

      • LAK says:

        A: please clarify why you think my statement isn’t prioritising the people in countries in which China is operating?

        MrsBump: i agree with most of your comment except the part about Chinese involvement being what we make of it.

        It matters not a jot that it’s the elites who benefit the most because that is true of every country including the Chinese and patronising western countries.

        What matters is our child-like acceptance of this exploitation.

      • MRsBump says:

        By “what we make of it” i meant, we need to set the tone to how we want to be treated. The longer we defer to those who seek to take advantage of us, the longer we will remain victims. The Corruption of our own people is our biggest downfall – our officials are so easily bought, so yes it does matter a great deal that the African elites are benefiting from the squandering of our collective wealth to the detriment of millions living in abject poverty. It is more than just theft, it is betrayal.
        Chinese investment remains an opportunity, albeit one that we have not used correctly so far, when so many of our ressources were signed away for paltry benefits. Hopefully it is not to late to remedy this situation.

    • dodgy says:

      Yeah, in the Caribbean, there’s CARICOM, but quiet as it’s kept, May, Gove and Johnson only want the white former colonies (Canada, Australia, New Zealand). This government doesn’t like brown /black people at all.

    • Ayra. says:

      Same case in the Caribbean. These guys never gave a hoot about us until so very recently, and it’s honestly the same vice versa.
      The government might like the attention whenever a royal decides to grace us with their presence, but the people? Ha.

    • Addie says:

      As an Aussie, I agree with you all. The Commonwealth seems to have more meaning for Brits than the rest of us in far-flung corners of the world. I don’t know what BRF tours actually achieve. Any trade/diplomacy can by done by governments.

      MRs Bump, you’re dead right: Britain is just trying to work out some deals after screwing itself with Brexit. Meanwhile, for years the Brits have ditched Commonwealth countries (EEC back in the day, and then the EU), used ‘colonials’ as cannon fodder in disgusting displays of arrogance and stupidity, relegated Commonwealth citizens to the Alien lines at British airports…

      Being cast adrift by the UK demanded that countries seek other markets and build other relationships. They have! And no-one is going to jeopardise those relationships for Britain. Yet still, the Brits have to lord it over everyone. Today all Commonwealth leaders were treated to a speech by the Queen wanting her aging sonny boy take over as Head of the Commonwealth. And for good measure she’s appointed grandson Harry to a non-job. Talk about being out of touch. She sees it as a role of hereditary privilege, while other countries want to share via merit. Only nepotism works??? I really hope the leaders stand firm.

  17. adu says:

    When it comes to MM’s fashion she shouldn’t mix friends and business. Jessica Mulroney has questionable taste. I think the working relationship worked as MM’s star rose as a second pair of eyes, but I think it’s time to friend-zone Mulroney permanently and work with someone else.

    • hdc364 says:

      This is exactly why I have low expectations for her wedding gown. Yesterday’s outfit was a hot mess from head to toe and looking in the mirror, she couldn’t see that. If Jessica had a hand in it then that is even worse. I like what she wears a good bit of the time, but in addition to a new stylist, she is also in need of a top-notch tailor.

      • Elaine says:

        I know! I am really worried about the fashion we’re going to get, going forward!! :-(
        If Megs thought that sideways bag was the bomb and totally appro for a reception where she is representing the QUEEN… :-/

        I just don’t know anymore *sighs shakes head sadly*

  18. kk2 says:

    For me, the outfit is a near miss. It just didn’t quite come together the way she probably intended. I think the problem is the buttons. Take the buttons off the dress and it’s much better. But I enjoy that she experiments with different stuff. And I have really liked 90 %of her outfits so far. I think they are going to really reinvigorate the royal family. Good match for Harry- her charisma is off the charts.

  19. Amelie says:

    I think this dress would work way better as a jumpsuit and would be really cute for a casual outfit. In fact that’s the kind of thing Anthropologie would sell, a pinstripe jumpsuit with short wide pants (minus the buttons). I didn’t like it yesterday and I still don’t like it today.

    • MeghanNotMarkle says:

      This. I was thinking yesterday that if this were a jumpsuit, the belt were shortened to a proper length, and she had a cropped jacket or something, the look would win for me. I like the pieces individually – save for the poor fit – but together it’s a hot mess.

  20. magnoliarose says:

    I had another look too, and I like it less. It just doesn’t look put together, and the elements don’t mesh. She should keep a look book and study herself critically. Her stylist is not very good and out of her depth.

  21. violet says:

    I agree with the repeat criticisms about the boxiness and awkward flow of the individual pieces. I think Meghan should shift emphasis from boxy middle and matchstick legs, and to her overall petiteness; the clothes she’s wearing only point up the disadvantages of petiteness. I would love to see her in stuff tailored within an inch of its life. Great side-seaming is a better way to give the illusion of more waist than wide belts. A springy dress can still be fitted, and a lighter weight blazer also with good side seaming, worn properly and buttoned, with peep toe pumps (or spectator pumps toning with the neutrals of the rest of the outfit (god I love spectator pumps and no one wears them any more and they are soooo timeless and classy) would have given her the look she’s aiming for and looked fresh but pulled together and professional. Ditch the stylist, Meghan!

    • SV says:

      Meghan has no interest in being tailored to within an inch of era life. She been on the record numerous times that she’s lived that life for years on the Suits set and it is not her personal style. Meghan isn’t making these choices out of ignorance. If anything she is showing her own actual personal style will not change. She has no desire to be completely polished. She likes long belter coats and to wear jackets draped over her shoulders and over-sized tops. This is who Meghan the person is. Not the character on Suits or the actress being paid to show up at event wearing a particularly designer’s outfit.

      • TheOriginalMia says:

        Thank you for saying this! She is not Rachel. She is Meghan who has her own distinct style. I appreciate wearing clothes that aren’t so freaking tight you can see he outline of every body part. She looks comfortable.

      • Olenna says:

        I get what you’re saying about Meghan wanting to express her own style, but (IMO) this outfit was a fail, top to bottom. I don’t believe anyone expects her to dress as she did on Suits, pencil skirts and whatnot. But, I think people do expect her to look polished, which includes her clothing fitting properly or tailored for her height and frame. A professional stylist could *guide* her in the right direction and still accommodate her personal style.

      • Beth says:

        Does it count as her own actual personal style if it’s actually a stylist, not Meghan herself, who is picking out the clothes? Not really

      • LAK says:

        I don’t think anyone is asking her to replicate her suits character regardless of whether it’s her personal style or not.

        This situation is best compared with Amal Clooney. On her own time, she is a quirky eccentric dresser. When she attends her professional commitments in conservative situations / institutions, she pulls together an appropriate professional look. In less conservative, but still professional situations / institutions, she’s again appropriately dressed. Her quirky, eccentric style expresses itself in the bright colours and accessories, but for the most part is reserved for personal, fun times.

      • minx says:

        Well, she needs help. She’s a beautiful woman with a small frame, it shouldn’t be so hard to dress her. She’s had more misses than hits.

  22. Nola says:

    Hate this look. It doesn’t match the season and she looked completely underdressed compared to the professional / business attire of everyone else. This is probably the lawyer in me speaking, but bare shoulders are inappropriate for professional / business events. If this was a garden party or the like, then I think bared shoulders are fine. But this was professional. Men and women are wearing suits & blazers. Markle’s dress misses the mark, completely IMO.

    I also hate that she and Harry are so obviously matchy-matchup. I know they’ve matched or coordinated in the past, but this time there’s a little too much of the twinning going on.

  23. thaisajs says:

    So many buttons! I’m sure Kate was jealous she didn’t nab this one first. Although she would have hidden it under another coat, so.

  24. adastraperaspera says:

    Love the human rights message. The top of the dress makes me think she would look cute in overalls! ;)

  25. Peg says:

    Meghan is not petite, her limbs are thin, if she gains weight it will just be in her mid-section.
    There is nothing she can do about her legs, and why should she.
    Personally if she is happy with what she is wearing, good for her.

  26. KiddV says:

    I like the outfit and love the shoes, but they’re a bit out of place there. An outdoor wedding would be perfect for it.

    And I swear I saw that dress on Sharon Stone 5 or 6 years ago.

  27. TheOriginalMia says:

    Great statement in the same vein as women’s rights are human rights. I hope she continues to speak out on these issues. It’s time to bring these issues and concerns into the light.

  28. Other Renee says:

    On taking a second look I’ve decided that this outfit is just as bad as I thought it was yesterday. The only thing I like is the shoes. But not on cobblestone. She may not want to look like her Suits character, but that doesn’t mean she can’t wear clothes that fit and stop playing with her messy hair.

  29. Montréalaise says:

    The dress is much too casual for the occasion. I know she and Jessica Mulroney have been best friends for several years so firing her as her stylist won’t be easy, but it has to be done – she really needs a new stylist, one who not only knows what is flattering but also what is appropriate for a member of the royal family and the official engagements she attends.

    On a somewhat related note, I note that Meghan’s half-siblings are at it again – both Samantha and Thomas Jr. are telling the press what a horrible person their half-sister is because she didn’t invite them to her wedding. There’s an interview with Thomas in the DM today, in which he unfavourably compares her to Diana, stating that Diana was genuine but Meghan is phoney. There’s a lot more, all in the same vein.

    • happy girl says:

      Speaking of her “family.” Andrew Morton has apparently said that not one Markle has received an invitation, including her father. (?!)

      Her mother will allegedly walk with her down the aisle. The grossest part of his comment was that one or two of the half-siblings will be outside Windsor Castle PROVIDING COMMENTARY. Can you imagine if this is true? Dear God, what a shameful shit-show.

    • Jaci says:

      I think the palace has missed a trick or two here. Her family are not going away and in fact after the wedding I think it will get worse. The half siblings will have noting to lose and every single family skeleton will come walking out of the closet.
      The sensible thing from a PR point of view would have been to make peace with the relatives and give them an invitation with strict NDAs about speaking to the press. I’m surprised this wasn’t done. My feeling is that Meghan must have misled the Palace in some way by stating that she ‘didn’t know these people,’ which is patently untrue as can be seen by childhood pictures and photos of Meghan present at her sister’s graduation. This doesn’t happen if you ‘don’t know these people.’
      My guess is that she has made quite a few enemies at the palace by not disclosing the real relationship. I’m sure the Queen is quietly fuming about being dragged into this dysfunctional family mess.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If you give a mouse a cookie. There are reasons to eliminate toxic people from your life, including generation-older step-siblings who were never part of her life to begin with. This is preferable to kowtowing and allowing them in, or keeping them close like drugging Uncle Gary.

      • Rayan says:

        I can understand MM cutting off her half siblings, they’re trashy personified! But her father? Not sure why he hasn’t been invited, if that is true.

      • Tonya says:

        Jaci, I don’t expect “the relatives” to go away- they have found an avenue to exploit. As long as the media “gives the relatives a voice” & the consumers continue to read, watch & purchase it will continue to occur.

        Harry & Meghan (& BRF) need to take note of those outlets… I don’t click onto, read or purchase because to me it is the same thing.

        Compared to royal family relatives’ scandals (adultry, illegitimate children, Nazi relatives & association, fraud, drug use, racism, etc.) Meghan’s crime of not inviting people who she has no relationship to presently…the same people who discriminated against her mother & herself (admitted by half siblings)…the same people who attempted to exploit her for financial gain (evident by half siblings)…the same people who desperately seek attention…

        Personally I think that it’s their (H&M) wedding to invite whomever they choose.

  30. Anna says:

    I have an abnormal hate for people who think that they’re classy and stylish when they wear their jackets and coats over their shoulders.

  31. jferber says:

    Can we elect her for President? I mean, really, can we elect her for President? We want her back, Great Britain! We’d love for Harry to come , too.

  32. ASHBY says:

    The playing with her hair thing seems really immature to me, she is 36 not 12.
    It’s as bad as when Kate does it.
    At least MM doesn’t have those hideous sausage curls.
    I usually appreciate MM style, except the very long pant thing, but this look is not right.
    The shoes are really inappropriate with that casual looking dress and for a daytime event.
    The dress does her no favors and that structured blazer makes her look like an American football player.
    I’m glad that they are taking on important causes, I think they might work harder than Kate and William.

  33. Mary says:

    I agree with you that the outfit needs to be burned. It is wearing her not the other way around. I do not think it would be flattering on anyone.

  34. notasugarhere says:

    Years ago Queen Mum surrounded herself with a group of elderly gay men as her entourage, friends, and care givers. Unfortunately after her death and the changeover with Castle Mey, the Castle staff ended up being openly anti-LGBT in their rental policies.

  35. notasugarhere says:

    These two have been named to the (very strange IMO) list of Time Magazine Most Influential People of 2018. List includes the CP of Saudi Arabia, Trump, and a host of others.

  36. Mrs. Smith says:

    I like the outfit in that it’s unexpected and tries to be a fun professional look. Per Magnoliarose—the look book is a marvelous idea. She needs to see how outfits move and work while being worn. I hate the jumper/overalls style straps—that feature alone would have made this outfit a NO for a professional outing. Maybe a cute clutch and black cropped blazer would have helped.

  37. FLORC says:

    I’m here for the cause. Not the dress. Because for many royals from various countries they wear horrible clothes, but the work takes over. Your outfit might be mocked, but only if that’s all there is to discussed. Like kate. All clothes little work. Clinton, letizia, Anne, etc… work over shadows.

    And a wonderful cause to start with. MM has absolutely hit the ground running

  38. STICKS says:

    I’m with you, Kaiser. Really hate it.

  39. Anare says:

    The outfit would be ok with the blazer all the way on. Blazer over the shoulders is gimmicky and over done. It just looks awkward. Dress alone is fug as hell. I hate everything about it. Rare misstep for Ms Markle.

  40. ... nik. says:

    Why is it more PC to talk about lgbt than race issues, or even woman’s rights? Not to mention modern slavery, etc. Obama had the same issue. Seems like some subjects are more ‘safe’.