Duchess Meghan & Harry ‘want to start a family right away,’ that’s their ‘priority’

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, attends a garden party at Buckingham Palace as part of the celebrations of the 70th birthday of the Prince of Wales

The newly married Duke and Duchess of Sussex are big business, so of course Us Weekly has put them on the cover yet again. I don’t hate it at all. Us Weekly doesn’t really have any new information, their cover story this week is basically just people talking about how Meg and Harry will try to get pregnant quickly and all of that. Enjoy!

The honeymoon locale: The palace kept the location top secret, but “one thing is for sure,” says the insider, “both want to be somewhere hot and sunny for two weeks. They want a good mix of sea and sun.”

They’re eager to start a family: Now, “having children is definitely a priority,” says a source close to Meghan. “She and Harry want to start a family right away — and she’ll start trying as soon as she can.” The royal insider seconds the duo’s enthusiasm. “They both can’t wait to start a family,” says the insider. But they also caution that timing is all-important with royals: “Harry and Meghan won’t rush into anything. They have a lot on their plate right now. But they both think that when the moment feels right, that will be the time to go for it. They’ll make fantastic parents.”

Nottingham Cottage starter home: Their cozy love nest is merely a starter home. “It’s perfect for right now, but not for the future, especially when they start a family,” shares the insider. “I can’t see them there beyond next summer.”

Her mom can’t wait to have a grandchild: Her mother, Doria Ragland, definitely supports that plan. As another confidant shares, “Doria is expecting to be a grandmother by this time next year. She’s very excited for Meghan to become a mother.”

[From Us Weekly]

I mean… of course they’re going to try to get pregnant really quickly. I think that’s one of the big reasons why Meghan was “fast-tracked” by the royal family too. It was a combination of things: she’s bright and adaptable, Harry was crazy in love and he didn’t want to be cautious, and they wanted to get started on the babymaking. I think I’ve already said this, but my mom believes that Meghan is already pregnant, and that she was preg at the wedding. We’ll see!

The newly married Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, leaving Windsor Castle after their wedding to attend an evening reception at Frogmore House, hosted by the Prince of Wales

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News, cover courtesy of Us Weekly.

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

132 Responses to “Duchess Meghan & Harry ‘want to start a family right away,’ that’s their ‘priority’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jane says:

    Meghan already pregnant? I’m not sure of that.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      Time will tell I guess, but I really, really doubt she was pregnant at their wedding.

    • KNy says:

      Me, too. I think that she’s very, very aware of being “proper.” The tabloids there have not exactly been kind to her, and getting pregnant before the wedding would be a whole other level of negative coverage. I know it’s 2018, but the British tabloids are vicious and she’s already been subject to racism.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if she had a fertility work-up before the wedding, though. If anything was amiss, they could have harvested eggs and made embryos to fast-track IVF.

    • ennie says:

      My then boyfriend and I wanted to get pregnant as soon as possible due to to my age. We went to see my doctor and he could us to drop the birth control before the wedding. Who knows? maybe Meghan and Harry are expecting if they did the same, maybe a few weeks into it. I don’t think she’d risk to have nausea or feel ill at that important day, but anything is possible.
      Plot twist: we had 2 supposed pregnancies, but we never had bio children and we had to adopt. We started trying for real when I was 34. Good for them if they are already on it.

  2. Seraphina says:

    Of course she and PH are keen to start a family. Any female in their late 30s when married and in love would be as well. And since this man can actually pay the bills and the family is ESTABLISHED, to say the least, any bright female with an ounce of sense would be too.

    I see nothing wrong with how MM is approaching her life and she is making correct life choices. Rational and logical ones that many of us “ordinary” women would also make.

  3. SunnyT34 says:

    Duh, she is getting close to 40 and has said she wants kids, she can’t afford to wait! I know you can have kids later in life (I did), but it can take longer and your eggs are more fragile, leading to a bigger chance of issues in your child. It would be lovely to know your babies will be supported in style with all of that wealth behind you. Hope they are blessed with health kids soon.

    • AG-UK says:

      So true I was 40 and ended doing IVF in the end but started at 36-37 unexplained they said. After 30 the eggs you produce decrease 10 fold. You spend most of your life trying Not to get pregnant then when you want sometimes doesn’t go to plan.

    • thaisajs says:

      I think she’s 36 right? That’s right about the age where your fertility starts dropping rapidly. I hope she froze some eggs and I hope they’re getting to it. Cause it can take a long time and there’s no time to lose if they want more than one.

  4. AideVee says:

    That last picture of them leaving the house for the reception 😍

    What a beautiful couple- I secretly hope that she is already preggers too.

  5. Peg says:

    No new info from US Weekly, I could look at the pictures and write the same story.
    Harry and Meghan are going to Australia in October and a few other Countries that may have the Zikia virus, so if you’re pregnant or planning to try, it’s advised to stay away from places with the ZV.

  6. Snowflake says:

    I love them together! My mom thinks she married Harry for money, I think she married him for love

    • C says:

      She married him just like any other woman marries wealthy and influential people – the thrill of the lifestyle, the social status, the money – all that play in a woman’s head as love.

      • Alix says:

        Wow. Do wealthy and influential people have nothing else about them to love?

      • C says:

        Why does a woman frequent expensive social circles? To look for love? I doubt that, honestly. If you want love why limit yourself to a narrow niche?

      • Tina says:

        He was one of the most eligible bachelors in the world, not just for his money or social status. He’s not exactly James Packer. Also, her ex looks like him. He’s clearly her type.

      • Carrie1 says:

        Callous. It’s a gross feeling reading this. You may be a calculating sort but everyone else is not thank goodness

      • magnoliarose says:

        Just stop. I get sick of this tired narrative reducing human beings into a bank as if they have nothing else of consequence to offer. Harry isn’t an inanimate object but a person with qualities and maybe she found them to be appealing.
        This kind of thinking is why wealthy people tend to group together and become suspicious of anyone’s intentions when plenty of people aren’t money grubbing a-holes. Plenty of people can love a person for who they are. Unfortunately far too often they have to endure being called all sorts of unkind names because they fell in love with someone of means.
        Harry isn’t a feckless dolt.

      • Olenna says:

        ITA, Carrie1 and magnoliarose. I was thinking about the underlying resentment the OP seems to reveal in every comment about Meghan when I saw yours. Now, I see that it’s mainly about wealthy, successful people in general.

      • Veronica T says:

        I don’t think anyone, even Meghan’s biggest fans, can deny she is calculating. Of course she married him for money and, more importantly, the fame she had been chasing for almost 20 years. Denying that is naive. She may love him, but love is more than one thing – his looks, personality, status, fame, money.
        And so much for saving the world. Right after they have 2 or 3 kids the British taxpayers will support.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I’m not a fan, merely a defender of someone who has been attacked for the sins of being bi-racial, divorced, and working for a living. It may be your opinion she’s calculating and everything else you wrote, but it is not mine.

        Their kids will never be working royals. Will they be supported sideways by the taxpayers until they are 18? Yes. Just like Louise, James, Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Lady Sarah and her brother Linley. Then they will have to go out an earn a living, with far more pressure and scrutiny than even the Yorks have experienced. Unlike W&K’s kids who will be on the dole their entire lives.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Veronica T, stop. No everyone doesn’t think she married Harry for his money, for the simple reason that Meghan has her own money, which she worked hard for. She wasn’t living off her parents money or anyone else’s before she met Harry AND when she got divorced from her first husband she didn’t take any money from him or alimony – all she took was a $100 blender and sent back her engagement and wedding rings to him. (And we know she only took the blender because Trevor couldn’t stop whining about it and said himself she didn’t take any money, just that damn blender).

        If Meghan was a gold digger, then she’s bad at it. Since, you know, when you divorce the guy you’re supposedly gold digging, you should at least take more than a $100 blender from him. Especially when you get married in California (where Meghan and Trevor’s civil ceremony was) which is a community property state. (Meaning you’re entitled to half of everything).

        And excuse me, chasing fame? Just because she was an actress? Not everyone acts because they want to be famous. And they especially don’t keep at it when facing almost 10 years of mostly rejection from the industry, before FINALLY landing a regular series. You also seem to forget that her first passion was always politics and activism, which she’s been involved with since she was eleven years old, and only didn’t get to work at the US State Department because she couldn’t pass the notoriously difficult test to do so. Otherwise, she likely would have been an ambassador and not an actress.

        Yeah, I agree with others here. People are projecting their own issues with wealthy and/or famous people onto her (along with other things about her – her race, age, etc). Because nothing in her life up until now shows or backs up any of the things they keep trying to say she is (shallow gold digger, fame whore, etc).

      • Milla says:

        Meh i do not think so
        H is powerful yet vulnerable. That is sexy. She is not a trophy wife. The lifestyle of royals is not as impressive as marrying an unknown millionaire.
        With Kate, it was a fantasy, a crush. Will was really cute 15 yrs ago. Again, both Meg and Kate married because they felt it was right.

      • Olenna says:

        Well said, nota and morrigan. And, I’ll say here for the record that the willfully ignorant, the disturbed, and the bigoted do not speak for me, and the only *calculating* I see is their persistent, bizarre campaign to discredit Meghan with lies and innuendo written under the guise of “opinions”.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Olenna what those who keep making these claims that have no basis based on the things Meghan has actually done and shown don’t seem to understand is, if all Meghan was out for was money and fame, then *she was already working in an industry that had men there who could get her that.*

        She could have “calculated” to meet a studio head, a director, a producer a world famous A-list actor. Someone who hooking up with, marrying, and then divorcing would have been a whole lot easier to do than getting involved with the British Royal Family. She wouldn’t have had to go though half the racist BS she’s had to go though for one, not to mention not having to have her entire family drama played out on the world stage.

        Being with Harry is frankly a big freakin’ headache. Way more than needed, if all you’re looking for is money and fame and you are already a part of an industry where you can get that same thing dating someone who doesn’t bring you that kind of headache along with them if you really want it. Hell, she’s not even going to be acting anymore, and told her agent to stop looking for hiatus work for her when the news that she was dating Harry first broke. So she didn’t even try to parlay just dating Harry into getting some bigger acting roles.

        A lot of these shots at her just lack so much logic.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I do not doubt MM wanted a better life for herself. Don’t most people? I think she has great networking skills and likes mixing with people with influence. So what?
        She worked in an industry where she was exposed constantly to men with more money than Harry and fewer headaches of royal life.
        If she were going to gold dig then a billionaire would have been a better target. That is real access and real undeniable wealth. She would get all the royal perks without the scrutiny and could buy herself a high profile.
        I defend her because she hasn’t done anything to deserve the nonsense. And I hate racism, bigotry, sexism, and classicism. I hate the excuses bigots make to attack this woman.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @magnoliarose what gets me wrt the classicism stuff is, Meghan is American. America just does not have the class system the UK does. So working hard and moving up in the world and mixing with wealthier people just isn’t seen as social climbing if you get there by, again, working hard and having good networking skills. (And not by, lets say, taking the Kardashian route).

        For goodness sake, it’s a standard thing here in the US during election time to here people running for office taking about their “humble” beginnings and how hard they worked to get to where they are today.

        Hell, in the states, being able to network well is something that is taught in college, and looked upon as a *good* skill to have, especially in the business world. And being able to network and hustle is one of the backbones to actually getting work in the entertainment industry. I’ll bet anything Meghan wasn’t thinking about class or social climbing (in the UK sense) when she was doing what she was doing, including the networking. As I said in another post, the only thing she probably knew of the UK class system was probably from watching things like Downton Abbey. She was just doing what all Americans strive to do, which is live the best life she could, doing the job she wanted to do, and working hard to get there.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Veronica T, I notice you don’t have a rebuttal for anything I said. All I did was point out the facts of Meghan’s life (including those of the industry she used to work in). For me, this is about facts, not worshiping. And as the saying goes, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

        So if you have any facts you want to use to back up your *opinion* on Meghan, I’m here. Otherwise, you too have a good weekend.

      • Olenna says:

        @morrigan01, the OP’s comments are deliberately antagonizing and illogical. If you notice, when someone does bother to check her or call her out for the more blatantly ridiculous ones, the comments disappear.

      • M says:

        Wow, you’re all so invested in it passionately. First of all, it’s ridiculous to have a D list actress who’s made D list screen appearances in revealing sexy scenes and lingerie outfits (don’t remind me of the library sex scene in suits…) and insinuating hot-dog commercials to be called a royal name or to get people curtsy to her. Do you comprehend how disproportionate that is? You actually mean that a regular person let’s say a nun whose been pure and sainty all her life has to curtsy to this woman? You must be truly joking…

      • Olenna says:

        @M, all joking aside, no one needs an outmoded morality lesson. But, what seems disproportionate here is the bigotry and level of animosity directed at a person who has come by her success through her own drive and intelligence without breaking the law, committing any lascivious acts, or harming anyone. And, no one *has* to curtsy to anyone. People do have free will, you know.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @M Your slut shaming is duly noted, thank you. Meanwhile, some of use aren’t about putting other women down like that, and actually look at who they are as people, not, as @Olenna said, by outmoded morality and madonna/whore BS.

        Meghan has some of you haters of her so pressed. Really, the last time I saw some of this same stuff said about a person, it was with Barack and Michelle Obama. From the silly conspiracy theories (Barack) to trying to police her clothes and body (Michelle). I can’t quite put my finger on what the Obamas have in common with Meghan, hmm . . .

        The way Meghan and Harry were gazing at it other on the balcony during Trooping of the Color today, I hope you haters are prepared to keep raising these same, tried things for years and years to come. Because, unlike the Obamas, Meghan doesn’t have a government mandated term limit for her time as Duchess.

      • Tina says:

        @M, I wouldn’t worry so much about the morality of the wife of the 6th in line to the throne (which seems fine in any event, there’s nothing immoral about acting), when the next king and queen consort conducted an affair for decades and couldn’t be married in the church of which one day he will be the Supreme Governor.

    • Harla says:

      I agree with you Snowflake, they are crazy about each other!!

    • PrincessK says:

      Firstly, Harry was the most eligible bachelor in the world, and our Meghan got him even though unlike many women she did not plan to. Secondly, I think it is highly likely that Harry’s kids will be working royals….it will be very difficult for the children of such a famous couple to lead ordinary lives.

      • Polly says:

        I assume their kids lives will be similar to the “ordinary” lives of others in similar circumstances, ie. Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara and the rest of the queen’s grandchildren. Which honestly is probably better than being a working royal. Less scrutiny, more freedom, but still plenty of perks.

  7. Lyla says:

    I took my aunt grocery shopping and while waiting in line, my aunt saw the national enquirer that said HM were expecting twins. 🤦🏻‍♀️ My aunt is super naive and totally bought it.

  8. Loren says:

    They are such a lovely couple .

  9. Sojaschnitzel says:

    Fun fact: I was shopping yesterday, in germany, and a german “newspaper” had them pregnant already, with twins! :D I forgot the name of the paper but I can go and check on monday if anyone is interested.

  10. aquarius64 says:

    No way Meghan was pregnant by the time of the wedding. One Meghan would have been accused of trapping Harry, using the pregnancy to assure he couldn’t back out. Two, the time of conception and birth of her child impacts the line of succession the child’s right to be a successor to the throne. Harry and Meghan are not going to want the baby be labeled by the press or declared by Parliament illegitimate, especially after what Harry went through with his mother and James Hewitt.

    • Alix says:

      I don’t think the time of conception matters, it’s the time of birth. Anne Boleyn was pregnant when she married Henry VIII, which is why they fast-tracked those secret nuptials. Her daughter, Elizabeth, was born ‘legitimate’. Of course, the girl was later denounced as a ‘bastard’, but that’s an entirely different story.

      • Anon says:

        Alix is right – in English law a child is legitimate if its parents are married when it is born. Hence the notion of the shotgun wedding. There would be no point if it would make no difference to whether or not the child was legitimate.

  11. Becks1 says:

    Aw I hope they have kids soon. Their kids will be so adorable!

    I highly doubt she was pregnant at the wedding. If she was, she was just barely pregnant. She knows if she had a baby next February people would definitely do the math and raise eyebrows.

  12. Roe says:

    Given Meghans age I wouldn’t be surprised if she is pregnant by the end of the year

  13. Zondie says:

    I can’t wait for them to have children but the writing in this US article is so bad!! I just want to take out a red pen and edit out all the nonsense and redundancy. Kaiser is right, US is really trying to milk these two for everything they’ve got!

    • Harla says:

      Oh god Zondie, you hit on one of my biggest peeve with these magazines! The constant redundancy drives me crazy! Also, I just read People’s coverage of the wedding and they stated that the larger diamond in Meghan’s ring is one of Diana’s and the smaller stones are from Botswana! Does no one proofread anymore? Does no one check facts, facts that they accurately reported on not all that long ago??

  14. Sway says:

    When you are in your late thirties and want children, it’s the most logical thing to start trying “right away” after you get married. Why wait? I kinda think they are already trying and have been trying even before the wedding. I think it will happen right away too…

  15. Citresse says:

    Hoping for a Valentine’s baby for Harry and Meghan. Best Wishes!!!!

  16. Pix says:

    Ooh good gossip. I wonder if they were old dresses she’s wearing or new dresses.

  17. Harla says:

    As much as I want them to have a sweet, happy family, I also want to see Meghan hit the ground running, get her charities together and establish her royal work before she disappears to have kids. Now, I know that she might not disappear after having kids but I guess Kate’s disappearances has me a bit spooked that this might become a trend among the younger royals.

    • Maria says:

      Kate had two years to hit the ground running before she had George. I think Meghan will get pregnant soon, and we will see if she will hit the ground running. Looking good so far.

    • LAK says:

      Kate is the outlier. Kate is the outlier. Kate is the outlier.

      This statement needs to be repeated every time you catch yourself using Kate as the benchmark of royal brides.

      • Harla says:

        Thanks for the reminder LAX!!

      • Tourmaline says:

        So right. Every other royal bride went to a job somewhere most days a week before she got married. Even teen Lady Diana was out there hustling working in childcare, cleaning flats, etc.! Kate is the outlier who spent the bulk of her pre-wedding years lazing around her parent’s luxury Chelsea flat waiting for the proposal and focusing pretty entirely on her personal life for 5 plus years after college.

        Meghan is used to work–not that starring on Suits was digging ditches, but she had real work and time commitments to balance. Her baseline for work ethic has got to be better than Kates.

      • morrigan01 says:

        Yes, @LAK, thank you for continuing to point this out. Especially for people like me who haven’t followed the Royals much before now. (At least, not in this kind of way. I always came at them more from a historical perspective, when I bothered to look at them at all).

        Acting may not be back breaking work, but filming schedules can be long and tiring. I’m sure Meghan spent at least between 12 to 17 hours a day on set, at least five to six days a week. Having a regular 8-hour a day/5 days a week job (which is the length most jobs in the US) would be easy for her, and we know she’s already has those types of jobs as well before she found success as an actress, when she worked as a calligrapher and taught gift wrapping.

        I myself have said that the two women are completely different people with completely different outlooks on life, their work ethics just being one of those things.

      • Green Girl says:

        I agree with you all. To add to Morrigan’s great point: Not only are acting schedules long and tiring, but don’t most actors have to keep looking for their next project, too? So while you’re working on a network show, your agent might have you audition for a film or commercials that you can do during your hiatus. That takes an incredible amount of resilience to keep looking for work.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Green Girl, yep, actors always have to hustle. My dad worked in the industry, and the industry is pretty much built on hustling for you next job – and that doesn’t just mean actors. That goes for all crew people as well.

        If you get a job working on a tv series, that at least guarantees steady pay for some months – depending on how many episodes the series shoots for. But you still have the off/hiatus months where, if the hiatus is a long one, you have to line up other work during that time. Otherwise, you’re just sitting on you ass, waiting for hiatus to end and you can get paid again.

        Meghan seemed to have used her hiatus time to try and either do film/tv movie work, as well as her humanitarian work interests.

        People mistakenly think working in the industry is glamorous all the time. And while their are some cool things about it (on-set catering is usually awesome), a lot of it is just long and tiring. (Like Meghan, I hung out on sets with my dad too when I was a kid). And you are almost always looking for your next gig.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Thanks LAK for your indefatigable defense of truth. lol

        It is hard work but in another way like you point out. I worked very hard in a glamorous industry but it wasn’t the actual work that was hard but the getting the work, schedules and lifestyle sacrifices that were hardest. The constant barrage of harsh criticisms and rejection wasn’t so easy either. Navigating the industry was like walking a minefield sometimes and there were plenty of politics involved. And moral dilemmas. Just a bunch of other things that made it stressful.

  18. Amelie says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if we get a pregnancy announcement by the end of the year. Meghan isn’t old by any means but she is 36 and while it is perfectly possible to get easily pregnant at that age I would guess they’d want to start trying as soon as possible. It makes sense.

  19. Starryfish says:

    My money is on a pregnancy announcement by the end of February 2019. Meghan seems serious about wanting to get going with the work part of things, so I’d be surprised if they started trying right away. If they aren’t pregnant by spring I’ll really feel for Meghan, because the womb watch in the press will be ruthless. People unfortunately haven’t learned to mind their own business when it comes to women’s bodies yet.

  20. Veronica S. says:

    Not that surprising. She’s already in her thirties, so if they want children without the risks that may come with later pregnancies, they have to get started in the next couple of years.

  21. Weedarkone says:

    I have a friend who is in Ireland right now. She said they were kicked out of Ashford Castle in Cong, Ireland bc Harry and Meghan are there.

  22. HeyThere! says:

    I can’t wait for their babies! Harry will be an amazing father! Meghan’s probably going to be the most beautiful pregnant lady ever.

  23. Sayrah says:

    I can’t wait for the pregnancy announcement. I’m truly happy for them but no surprise that they are ready to get the ball rolling. She’s 36 after all. Maybe this is why she’s doing lots of events now so that if/when she needs to slow down soon it will be favorable to the public.

  24. Suze says:

    So I don’t think we needed an article to tell us that. At their age it is kind of obvious. Just wondering when she was on suits I never heard anything about her no press coverage, no articles about her charity work. Why all of a sudden will she be the most “beautiful pregnant lady ever “ Oh right because she married a prince. So much for feminism Women really buy into this a woman is so much better with a man and worthy of praise. Just like AngelIna was so amazing in the press with brad and now they have kind of dropped her. Makes me sad. She is still doing the same work but it is rarely reported. Seriously can we just post normally about women here and not get crazy just because they married a famous man? Can women just be known for who they are and not who they married? I long for the day until then we will never move ahead in society at all. Putting her or Kate on a pedestal because they married well sets us all back

  25. morrigan01 says:

    IMO, she won’t get pregnant until winter of this year – either November or December, after the Invictus Games in Australia are over. She will be pregnant for about half of 2019 IMO. I think the next Invictus Games being pushed back to 2020 is so Harry can focus on her and the kid, and not have to worry about Invictus in October of 2019.

  26. Ari says:

    This is not news.

    I doubt she was pregnant during the wedding but I do think she will get pregnant fairly soon.

  27. jferber says:

    I love the picture of them leaving together with Harry holding Meghan’s hand. They are so gorgeous and sexy! I am in love with this couple. This is what true passion and love look like. I wish them every blessing and I cannot wait for the pregnancy news.

  28. MavenTheFirst says:

    I believe Harry wants babies but Meghan? There was no indication in the engagement interview that she was broody like Harry. But for sure, she will pop them out.

  29. KeepingItReal says:

    She has to start popping out kids pretty soon if she wants them, she’s 36.

  30. Himmiefan says:

    They need to spend some time together as a couple and settle into married life, maybe give it until the end of the year then start trying.

  31. PrincessK says:

    I am watching the trooping of the colour and I bet that Kate will bring little Prince Louis out onto the balcony, so it will be a tussle between who get the headlines Louis or the Sussexes on the balcony.

    • Masamf says:

      LOL,😂😂 No little Lou was a no show.

    • homeslice says:

      I doubted highly that the infant would be brought. Everyone looks good and especially Bea looking better than she has in a long time!

    • Olenna says:

      No Louis, but media attention is on H&M as predicted.

      • homeslice says:

        This is total snark, but Kate’s huge hat, knowing Megs would be behind her. lol.

      • Olenna says:

        Ha! Kate is so tall, she didn’t need the big hat. I did kinda like it, though.

      • PrincessK says:

        From the body language I saw Charles and Camilla looked embarrassed and apologetic at the way in which Kate almost totally blocked out Meghan, and made no concessions at all. Other members of the RF also noticed it too. But quite funny how so many minor royals managed to position themselves in the front row, I suppose its their few minutes of fame lol!

        H&M are the most popular couple on the balcony without needing to try, I am sure they did not want to be at the front and poor Kate would have gained points if she had been more considerate. As it stands it shows that she is feeling threatened and pulling rank when there is no need. Meghan will be on the front pages tomorrow and remain there.

        I also saw William looking at how his father was tenderly touching Harry’s hand on the balcony.

      • Nic919 says:

        Before the Queen and co had returned from the trooping, Kate was standing front and centre in the balcony to the point where she was blocking Camilla out of the way. Someone needs to remind her that Camilla outranks her and will be queen consort first. Meghan and Harry were standing further back, not hogging the central area but what is hilarious is that when you see the shots with the Queen, Meghan’s head is in most of the shots. Anyway, the best part were the shots of Harry looking at Meghan while everyone else was looking up to see the planes.

        Andrew was also on the other side of the Queen taking up room to the point that you could barely tell Camilla was there.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Nic919 I was watching the BBC One live stream, and the cameraman STAYED on Meghan and Harry during the first part of the balcony, even with Kate standing front and center. And the commentators talked a lot about them too (such as Harry looking like he was explaining things to her) and how there was a LOT of international press and attention for the Trooping this year thanks to the wedding.

        I also kinda love how Harry and Meghan stayed in the back, and didn’t even try to go further forward. They clearly were both fine with where they were. And during the second balcony moment, they were both really chatty with Charles and Camilla, all four of them smiling. And the BBC One was focused all on it.

  32. Svea says:

    What’s gross about this is now we are in for months if not years of the heinous “bump watch.” Is there any more gross or intrusive, privacy-busting media device than this scrutiny of a woman’s body for signs of pregnancy? I evn loathe the made-up word “bump.” So disrespectful.

    • Vox says:

      Yeah. I’m kind of surprised people are happy to talk about this. I know Harry is open about wanting kids but just because she’s 36 doesn’t mean they HAVE to start now or that her reproductive organs are our business, especially since she’s not popping out heirs like Kate, which unfortunately has always been public business. It’s sad it still is in 2018.

  33. Liriel says:

    Wow so many people project the worst things on kate. She was so respectful of Meghan and today of course she didn’t tru to upstage her, even the colour she wore was muted (remember the gorgeous res dress). Btw, sorry but next to Kate Meghan looks short and very ordinary. And who does have the smug expressions now? Meghan!

    • PrincessK says:

      I don’t know what you saw but I saw Meghan and she was dressed simply but looked stunningly beautiful. It seems as though they had sunshine on their honeymoon break because her arms and shoulders are nicely bronzed. What a pity we did not get a full length view of her dress, hopefully we will see it again.

      I say roll on visit to Cheshire next week with the Queen and roll on Ascot, where hopefully Kate will not block out Meghan. People were frustrated by it today and the photographers who had been planning on a money shot of Meghan on the balcony. But the poor girl will be faced with decades of trooping the colour ceremonies.

      • Jag says:

        On the honeymoon, they spent some of he time outside, Meghan is sporting a tan.
        The dailymail is covering its behind, claiming they were in Canada and Ireland.
        These two can really keep things on lockdown.
        Meghan’s dress was by Venezuelan Carolina Herrera.
        The queen was somewhere this week and took off her coat indoors, Duchess of Cornwall was sitting with the Queen and Prince Charles and her legs were crossed at the knees, so two myths down.

      • LAK says:

        Jag: Just wanted to point out that whoever said that crossing of knees or ankles was subject to protocol was making things up.

        Some things are merely old fashioned good manners eg crossing your legs at the ankles and slanting your legs to the side. This is the best way to prevent crotch shots if you wear skirts.

        People take regular things and turn them into protocol assumptions just because some royal ladies do them.

        That said, Kate is the outlier of royal brides. She tends to do things her own way and most often breaks protocol. It takes years for her to correct.

      • Nic919 says:

        Meghan looked amazing I thought. I am sure there will be a blog about it tomorrow where many will have the vapours about the dress being off the shoulder, but it was a great dress on her.

      • Nic919 says:

        @princessK so do you think the christening date gets announced just before the Meghan and Queen visit, or will it be a “random” outing with the kids coincidentally caught by a passer-by / pap?

      • homeslice says:

        “poor girl”…in what world??? LOL.

    • Nic919 says:

      Kate looked grumpy in most of the photos except for the huge fake smile when the Queen passed by. She’s also back to her skinny self so maybe it’s hunger causing the grumpiness. In any case if she keeps looking grumpy every time Meghan is around it’s going to be more than a coincidence.

      People in the crowd who attended had reported that there was definite extra loud cheering when Harry and Meghan came by in the carriage.

      I actually thought Kate’s outfit was nice, minus the puffy shoulders. She should have worn this colour for the wedding to avoid the passive aggressive “is it white or not” debate.

      • morrigan01 says:

        What I noticed, aside from Harry and Meghan bliss-filled looks at each other and Harry cutely explaining some thing to Meghan, was Charles and Camilla chatting with Harry and Meghan during the flyover. Like, they were all so chatty together in the back.

        I don’t really want to drag Kate for looking grumpy because she might be going though so serious postpartum right now. And I’ve never had a baby, but I kinda wonder if she almost killed herself dieting and exercising to lose the baby weight. That could be attributing to some postpartum things as well.

        Also, can I just repeat that all that BS about Meghan and Kate being BFFs the tabs tried to push was just that – BS. I don’t see anything between those two women except cordiality, which is fine.

      • Nic919 says:

        @morrigan I didn’t see the live feed, but that is very interesting. It’s good for Meghan in the long run to have Charles and Camilla on her side. She doesn’t have that much family she can trust.
        I too agree that Meghan and Kate are not going to be BFFs at 36. They have totally different interests and Kate prefers to hang out with her sister and mother. I think she allowed William to isolate her from the Windsor side of the family because it never looks like says much of anything to the various cousins. Meghan seems to be taking Harry’s approach, which is to socialize more.

  34. alittlesugar says:

    Kate being isolated from the Windsor side? I highly doubt that. She’s been known to have a good friendship/close bond with the queen, Zara, Sophie and even Camilla. We know the queen has approved of Kate and Kate’s been seen interacting closely with Zara and Sophie. Kate and Camilla seem comfortable to be together in the carriage every year at trooping the colour. It doesn’t seem as if she is isolated – she’s formed bonds with 3 of the more important Royal women after all. It’s not like she has to do so with every cousin of William’s. Not even your average, non Royal woman does that.

  35. Jag says:

    I thought you were joking about Kate, no christening date, but Kate and the two kids are at a charity polo event with Willian,she is running around in a 40 pounds Zara dress.
    I have never seen this woman so animated.

  36. alittlesugar says:

    @nota, she certainly is. In 7 years she’s been known to have more of a bond than Meghan has in a month. The idea that Meghan has a stronger one than Kate seems fantasised, considering how long Meg’s been married. Maybe we should judge and compare when Meghan’s completed 7 years of marriage.