Duchess Meghan told one Irish lady that she misses being an actress

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex in Ireland - Day 2

Here are more photos from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Irish tour. I’m still finding and using a lot of photos which I didn’t see before! Harry and Meghan photograph very well together, and I can see Meghan growing in confidence in her role every day. Do you think she ever regrets giving up her acting career though? Back when Grace Kelly married Prince Rainier, she ended up regretting it, because she hoped to still be able to make movies. For Meghan, it feels a bit different – she was part of an ensemble of a successful cable TV show, and she’s in her mid-30s. I don’t doubt that it was a hard decision for her, but let’s not pretend she was Grace Kelly, packing in a successful film career and retiring at the age of 26. Still, when Meghan was asked about Suits, she expressed some wistfulness:

Her life has changed beyond recognition since marrying into the Royal family, and it seems Meghan Markle is still feeling nostalgic about her showbiz career. Speaking to crowds during her visit to Dublin on Wednesday, the former actress revealed she ‘misses’ starring in US series Suits.

Meghan, 36, made the comment as she spoke to members of the public after visiting the Irish Emigration Museum in Dublin. Fiona Moore from Dublin described the Duchess as ‘relaxed’ and said: ‘I’m a fan of Suits and I said to her that I miss it and she said ‘so do I.”

[From The Daily Mail]

Regret? Or just being polite? Or just a general wistfulness? I don’t know. Meghan probably reflects back to her life as a minor celebrity, when she could just blog about wine and work on her show and live a pretty quiet life. Nowadays, people crawl up her ass over EVERY LITTLE THING. One of the latest things? Some comments she apparently made in casual conversation about the Irish referendum on abortion:

Few would be surprised to hear that Meghan Markle is pro-choice, and perhaps it was only natural, when meeting a number of activists in Ireland’s recent referendum to legalize abortion (the proposal was passed by a thumping majority) that she would express her enthusiasm for the cause. Unfortunately for Meghan, two of the women she spoke to about the issue at a garden party in Dublin last night then took to twitter to publicize their encounters, meaning Meghan has now been drawn into a debate about the limits of royal political neutrality.

An Irish politician said in a tweet that Markle told her she was ‘pleased’ with the result of the recent referendum to legalize abortion, while a well-known Yes campaigner and feminist journalist also tweeted that she had chatted to Markle about the campaign to repeal the 8th Amendment of the Irish constitution which forbade abortion, and strongly implied that Meghan agreed with her pro-choice views.

Catherine Noone, a senator for the the ruling Fine Gael party who was closely associated with the successful Yes campaign, also said she spoke to Meghan at the garden party held last night at the British ambassador’s residence in Dublin on Tuesday, where Harry and Meghan are on their first foreign tour as a married couple. The senator tweeted: “The Duchess and I had a chat about the recent referendum result—she watched with interest and was pleased to see the result.”

However, apparently quickly realizing her blunder—under the constitutional monarchy structure, royals have been prohibited since the 17th Century from expressing political opinions—she followed up with a second tweet that sought to backpedal on the claim, saying: “I should say she seemed pleased—she was interested and very measured, not political at all.”

Una Mulally, a respected journalist and noted campaigner for women’s rights, has left her tweet untouched although both of Noone’s tweets were subsequently deleted.

[From The Daily Beast]

I think the Windsors should do away with this notion that they should be apolitical, or that they’re capable of being apolitical. The Queen had thoughts about Scottish independence and Brexit. Prince William makes political gaffes. Charles is very politically minded. Meghan is not the first. Also: we should also do away with this idea that “women’s rights” are inherently a political conversation, as opposed to a universal human rights issue.

Royal Tour day 2

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex in Ireland - Day 2

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

143 Responses to “Duchess Meghan told one Irish lady that she misses being an actress”

  1. L84Tea says:

    She misses being an actress or she misses her beloved Suits cast and set? Those are not necessarily the same things.

  2. Georgia says:

    You can miss something without having regrets.

  3. Ravensduaghter says:

    The pearl clutchers will have their day now! “Why would Meghan miss acting (not a true profession-sniff, sniff) when she could be a Duchess and travel all over the world with her Prince Charming?”
    Honestly, I think @Georgia has it right.

  4. Louise says:

    I like Meghan, I really do. But I had honestly never heard of her before she dated Prince Harry. I had never seen Suits, and its not like she was actually THAT famous. Its always surprising when people call her a “Hollywood actress”. come on, she kinda wasnt? like her though. Not dissing her!

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Hollywood actress doesn’t mean you are super famous. It means you are a working actress in Hollywood. Which she was. And while Suits isn’t Grey’s Anatomy it is still an incredibly popular show worldwide – even if you’ve never watched it.

      • ccx says:

        Exactly. She’s a WOC who had a major role on a very popular and critically-acclaimed show for years. That’s nothing to scoff at, there’s a ton of “Hollywood actresses” who’d kill for a deal like this. There are good roles and awesome money to be made on TV, but for some reason a lot of people still think you’re not an actual actor unless you’re in movies, and being on TV is worse somehow. Many actors believe it themselves, and would rather be in a flop after flop but be a “movie actor” instead of looking for something decent on TV cause it’s below them.

      • g says:

        @ccx – This TV show isn’t really the creme de la creme. Hasn’t gotten any awards, I don’t know what you mean by popular. It’s one of many show out there. And honestly 99% of the globe’s population hadn’t heard of her before Harry.

    • Beth says:

      Same here. I’d never heard of her or Suits until she dated Harry, and I’ve still never seen the show. She wasn’t a well known actress, and I doubt she would’ve become an A-list Hollywood celebrity during her career, but not everyone does. I like her, and there’s no dissing from me either

    • Nancy says:

      Same here @Louise. I had never heard of Meghan, nor the show before Harry. There are so many bit actors/actresses like @Valently Varnished said. She isn’t Grace Kelly, a renowned actress ditching Hollywood to marry her Prince. They seem happy and like all moms say, isn’t that what counts!

    • Masamf says:

      With tons of shows introduced every year (depending on what country you are from), there are a lot of actors that have been around for a long time, are well known to their fans but not that well known to the entire world. Again, it depends on which country you are from since each country has their own shows and actors. Living in Canada, I never watch Big Bang Theory (apparently the actors are well known to their fans) and I was so surprised to find out that it has been running for almost as long as Two and Half Men, I couldn’t believe it. And I only found out about that during Charlie Sheen’s “winning phase” otherwise, if none of that hadn’t happened, I would still not even know there is a big bang theory and I know Im not alone. Lots of other shows, actors unknown for the most part but still great actors/shows. This is the case of Suits. If a show has been running for 7 solid years, it tells you rating are good and its a good show. The actors might not be as famous and thus not known to some people but that doesn’t mean they are “D” or “Z” list actors just because some people don’t know them. I have watched Rachel Zane and Michael Ross from the beginning and speaking as a fan of the couple, I can tell you Meghan is a really good actress (at least IMO). Her dating Harry was just icing on my cake since I like both Diana’s sons but I knew Meghan way, way before she started dating Harry, and again I know Im speaking for the millions that watch the show.

      • Natalia says:

        @masamf
        Very good analysis. I started watching Suits because of Meghan Markle and also because I love legal dramas. I got addicted to the show and binge watched it, then had to wait for seasons 7 and 8. Couldn’t believe I hadn’t found it until then. But then I’m really not much of a TV watcher. I hope if Gina Torres doesn’t return to the show that they will do a spin off with her. I read somewhere that they’re planning one or thinking about it.

        I love that the president of Ireland is a big dog person and I love that Meghan Markle is too. I’ll bet the Queen wishes she could reach out and pat that Bernese’s head but she probably wouldn’t!

    • magnoliarose says:

      I had heard of Suits because it is on one of the bigger cable networks but I have never watched it. Her face looked familiar but her name wasn’t.

    • Moneypenny424 says:

      I knew of Suits, but had never watched it. No, she wasn’t A-list, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t a successful Hollywood actress. You know how many people work their butts off and never get cast in anything? Thousands of actresses would kill for the success she had. The A list is about 1% of Hollywood.

    • Salanta says:

      You never hear about Suits… and yet, it really is surprisingly popular. It’s the 7th most tracked show on Sidereel, after Game of Thrones, The Big Bang Theory, The Walking Dead, Grey’s Anatomy, Modern Family and Supernatural! Who could have guessed?!

    • Louise177 says:

      I don’t know why people like to belittle Meghan’s career. Based on comments one would think she was a reality star or a porn actress. Just because she isn’t Meryl Streep or Jennifer Lawrence doesn’t mean her career is irrelevant or a joke. She was a main character on a popular show for years. There are people who’ve been in the business for decades who never been more than waiter #3. I also don’t understand the logic of assuming an actor/show isn’t significant because you never heard of them. With so many channels and services it’s impossible to see every tv show. There are a lot of popular shows that I don’t watch and only know of them because of gossip sites and entertainment shows.

  5. Betsy says:

    I like this dress even more today.

    ETA: reproductive rights should not be considered political. It is our rights as humans, as women. She should go ahead and have a (politely expressed, as she did) opinion. And I don’t think she regrets. I don’t regret leaving my job when I had kids, but I miss parts of it.

  6. Jessica says:

    I believe The Queen had private thoughts about hot button issues but didn’t express them publicly; but Charles is very political. Making a gaffe, even a political one, is different than exposing political views when you aren’t supposed to.

  7. Sarah says:

    I am fed up with them breaking protocol she not allowed a public opinion on it doesn’t matter what it is on its bad enough her father is blabbing all over the place without her starting

    • Holly says:

      @Sarah are you fed up with them “breaking protocol” or are you just anti-choice? Because why would you even care or why compare her to her untethered, estranged father? Really, you’re “fed up”? Are you British? Do you even have a dog in this fight? It’s weird.

      • Nancy says:

        Holly, I’m taking a stab in the dark that most of us on this thread are not British. I read comments every single day from people from other countries giving their thoughts on our unfortunate commander in chief, American celebs, etc. So actually, she does have a dog in the fight. Her opinion, which is as relevant as yours, mine or theirs.

      • Sarah says:

        I’m pro choice actually her comments where like her father he’s out spilling comments made by Harry that never should of been made she’s made comments she should she’s supposed to be neutral she’s in Ireland given are history with the England she not supposed to have an opinion we have had enough of hearing unelected officials opinions they can stick to the opinions on there law in the own country and leave us to our own

      • Jan90067 says:

        Sarah, you don’t know that Harry made any one of those comments. We DO know TM is a liar, claiming to have been in the hospital the exact time he was photographed getting a few happy Meal at McDonalds. So yeah, we DONT know Harry’s view on Brexit…only the babbling of a narcissistic man reading from a script to curry favour and a few bucks out of that parasite Piers Morgan.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @Jan9000

        Excuse me, but I’m actually quite irritated at your unfair description of Piers Morgan……

        What on earth have poor parasites done to deserve such an insult?

      • Masamf says:

        What exactly did Meghan say that has @Sarah so upset? They said she said “she was pleased”, okay? So what is so upsetting about Meghan being pleased about the outcome of a referendum? Whether she expressed an opinion (or hadn’t) on it or not, what difference does it make? The referendum was over, what is the big deal here? And please, women’s reproductive rights are NOT a political issue. What is very upsetting shouldn’t be whether a member of the BRF expressed an opinion on the outcome of the referendum but rather, that some people in this day and era still think they have a right to dictate to women what we should or shouldn’t do with our bodies. THAT’S what is very upsetting, not Meghan saying “Im pleased”.

      • jan90067 says:

        Bella: 😘

        I should apologize to all parasites. You’re right. Even they aren’t as horrible.

    • SlightlyAnonny says:

      Eh. I’m bored and should be working but @Sarah, please list the protocol she has broken. Let me take some out of the running for you:
      Crossing her legs – there is evidence of the Duchess Slant going back to Diana
      Bared shoulders – there is evidence of bared shoulders going back to QE2 as a young woman
      Having a political opinion – what she said was vague and being retold second hand but there is plenty of firsthand evidence of Prince Chuck having a political opinion up to and including not showing up to a dinner for a Chinese delegation because of their treatment of Tibet.

      What else you got?

      • Sarah says:

        And prince charles regularly gets ripped to pieces for his and rightly so the protocol she broke was airing her opinions in public people trying to blame the politician when when she wouldn’t have been able to write if it wasn’t said she should of just said it was a historic vote and stayed neutral and for crossing her legs the people who give a carp are the daily mail and celebitchy most people don’t care

      • Masamf says:

        @Sarah, Meghan’s opinion (if at all she expressed one) didn’t influence the referendum outcome, did it? I don’t get why you are so upset over a referendum that was overwhelmingly decided weeks before Meghan expressed an opinion on the RESULTS of said referendum.

      • Original Jenns says:

        @Sarah You addressed the “political protocol”, but you indicated that protocol has been broken multiple times (you’re fed up with it). What else has Meghan done? Or were you being the hyperbole police?

      • jan90067 says:

        Oh my goodness, bare shoulders go back HUNDREDS of years for royalty. Look at all the old paintings! Hell, just go back to Victoria! All of the ladies have sat with crossed legs at one point or another… Opinions? Yeah, that was a voted on referendum and all she did was validate the person she was speaking with. I think haters should just be upfront with the fact they don’t like Meghan, or Kate, or whomever is in their sight, and say so.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Faux outrage is a health hazard you know. Sarah really. Explain to me how she has harmed anything? She’s pleased with the result. So what. It is a human right’s issue NOT political. She didn’t get into a heated discourse about abortion.
      If she said this I am glad because I am sure it is how she really feels. And this cements in my mind the idea that she, Charles and Camilla get along.
      What are you REALLY angry about?

      • Natalia says:

        Bingo MagnoliaRose.

        And this may or may not be related to Sarah’s real feelings but the truly evil people aren’t those who are pro choice, it’s the “Christian” “God loving” people who dismiss and literally dump children completely after insisting that they be born.

  8. Amelie says:

    Well if she was asked what she thought about the referendum, how are you supposed to not sound political? Even if she said something as neutral as “I thought the outcome was very interesting and a huge change for Irish women” people would still be all over her. It’s very difficult to talk about abortion neutrally, people get very heated almost immediately.

    • perplexed says:

      I think it was the fault of the lady who tweeted/revealed what she said.

      • I agree, and it sounds like she realized it because she deleted her tweets.

      • S91 says:

        Nope, it wasn’t the Senators fault. Don’t be absurd. MM expressed her opinion, and she tweeted about it because she thought it was positive. No harm done.

      • perplexed says:

        I’m not being absurd. We wouldn’t know about the “breach” (If it is one) if the person MM was talking about hadn’t tweeted about it. Also, she deleted the tweet. She didn’t stand by it. In the end, she’s the originator of the debate over whether a breach was committed in a private conversation. Also, a decade ago could a conversation like this have been tweeted? A politician would have had to seek out a reporter to detail what was said.

        We all know now that the Queen disliked Margaret Thatcher. But the only reason we know that is because people spoke to biographers at some juncture in time, not because someone tweeted about it.

        I have no idea if protocol actually was broken. But whatever controversy has occurred could have been avoided if no one had tweeted about it, and the person who tweeted wasn’t MM. In private conversations, I imagine even the Queen expresses something in the way of an idea as I think you’d have to be completely on mute to not “slip up” in the way of expressing something, but most people don’t say what she’s said. Unless it’s a butler who repeats back what Diana said the Queen said, and even he hasn’t made the reveals in tweets…

    • Skylark says:

      There is no fault here! This is infantile shit-stirring, nothing more nothing less.

      The fact that something so utterly benign has been picked up by the English and international media is beyond pitiful. They should be ashamed of themselves.

  9. homeslice says:

    Go Meg! Personally I love she said that about the abortion referendum. It’s a sad day when that is not something allowed to be said publicly. It’s also sad that if she continues to voice such statements, life will be difficult for her.

  10. Tania says:

    They’re on this tour specifically for political purposes of rallying with allies after they leave the EU. How could they remain, “politically neutral”? It’s ridiculous to think they’re apolitical.

    And women’s rights is not a political issue. They’re human rights.

    • OriginalLala says:

      yes exactly! They are on this tour because of Brexit (a POLITICAL issue) and no one bats an eye, but a woman saying she is pleased that Irish women can control what happens to their bodies and people are losing their minds….safe access to abortions, and reproductive rights are not political, they are human rights.

    • magnoliarose says:

      How are you feeling btw Tania?

      I also think back to that poor woman who died when she was denied an abortion in Ireland even though her life was at risk. They needed to do this.

    • Nic919 says:

      Women having the right to control their own bodies is a human right. It is not political. Bodily autonomy is fundamental to any human and no one should be coming after Meghan for support the results. She has openly stated that she is a feminist so it’s not like being pro choice doesn’t flow from that position.

  11. Em says:

    I’m sure at some point she will miss it. Not Suits necessarily, but the freedom of her acting days. She had a good life back then, but was free to travel and meet new friends and wander around the city without every move having to be carefully planned or scrutinized.

    Royal life is probably still new and exciting, but eventually the engagements will become routine. The work won’t really ever go beyond showing up in a nice dress, cutting ribbons and small talk. Being uncontroversial and apolitical is her job. For an intelligent woman, that might become tedious over time.

    I hope she made the right choice for herself. If Harry is the love of her life, then it probably was.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Maxima, Letizia, Daniel, etc. all seem to be doing fine having the same restrictions in their roles. Or are you insinuating they are unintelligent? The royal job has restrictions, but not nearly as many as some people think. She has an enormous platform to do good. Let’s see whether or not she uses it.

      • Em says:

        When have I “insinuated” anything about Maxima, Letizia etc? I was simply reflecting on Meghan’s role and how things MIGHT feel. Obviously I don’t know her and have not professed to do so. What I’m saying is that it’s only natural to miss the good old days of freedom, a career and freedom of speech. I’m sure many royals who married into it miss their old lives sometimes, even if they are content with their current role. I don’t see the controversy in that.

      • notasugarhere says:

        “the work won’t really ever go beyond showing up in a nice dress, cutting ribbons and small talk. Being uncontroversial and apolitical is her job. For an intelligent woman, that might become tedious over time. ”

        Invictus Games, Sentebale, Dumfries House. The Prince’s Trust helping over 800,000 people get job training and start businesses. The World Childhood Foundation, Queen Silvia’s anti-sex trafficking charity. Princess Charlene’s anti-drowning charity that has taught 300,000 kids to swim in less than 5 years. Queen Maxima and UN microfinance. Maria-Teresa of Lux and her school for refugee children. Maria-Teresa and her international conference for survivors of sexual assault in war zones. That is their work too, and no, none of those things would exist without the royal being the driving force being them.

        What you dismiss as cutting ribbons and small talk are actually the heart of how royals stay in-tune with what is happening all over the country. Those meet and greets are both incredibly important at informing them about their jobs *and* how they stay in power. Clear you don’t understand the breadth of what royals can and should be doing in their roles.

        If she wants to make positive change in this role, she has that opportunity. They’re not going to stop her; Charles is likely going to encourage her to do as much as she can. He needs his line to be popular and seen as a positive force.

      • minx says:

        That “good” could be accomplished without keeping this stable of pampered poodles in utter luxury. Liquidate some or all of the BRF’s vast wealth and give it to charity in some form or another.
        I love the vicarious fashion chit chat as much as anybody, but neither Meghan nor the rest of this family have done one thing to deserve their wealth aside from being born or marrying well.

      • notasugarhere says:

        By all means, they need to cut out easily 90 percent of their expenses. There is no need for them to be kept at this level to do these roles.

      • Nancy says:

        Meghan’s two outfits in 90 minutes (I believe in Dublin), cost $22,000.00. Yes I agree with @minx that marrying well shouldn’t necessitate. as she said “pampered poodles.”

      • Addie says:

        The Head of State, Michael Higgins, whom the Sussexes met, earns €250,000 a year and actually campaigned to have his salary cut by nearly 25% when he took the job. He accomplishes a huge amount. I agree that the royals are ridiculously over-funded, totally unnecessary in this day and age. However, I’d say the Windsor’s are addicted to the lifestyle provided and would never be weaned off it. They really do think they are entitled to it.

      • PodyPo says:

        @notasugarhere Regarding this comment: “Charles is likely going to encourage her to do as much as she can. He needs his line to be popular and seen as a positive force.” I wonder if you think Charles might become jealous of Meghan’s popularity as he did with Diana?

  12. NYC_girl says:

    I am sure she is totally acting, and it comes in handy when you need to be “on” with so many people and strangers and meeting people and being social…. but she really does a good job! I watched her chat with the masses in some IG post yesterday and she was social and seemed really nice and engaging. One woman told her her name and she replied it was her grandmother’s name. I am enjoying watching her outfits and definitely have a love for Englishmen <3 but otherwise the RF is a major yawn to me ;)

  13. Sparkly says:

    I think it’s ridiculous to have an apolitical monarchy, personally. If they’re not working for the betterment of the people, they don’t earn their lavish lifestyle. But I absolutely agree that women’s rights are human rights issues.

  14. Beck A. says:

    Of course she misses Suits and the acting, it was her life before moving to the UK. I have liked the other looks of this tour but this dress is so not flattering, we don’t need to see the exact contours of Meghan’s body. Tacky.

  15. Chris says:

    Agree that the Windsors should jettison this silly apolitical nonsense. It’s impossible anyway. Supporting women’s rights is a political issue since women’s full equality would upset the current world order. And vice verse: refusing to take a stance is also a political position that endorses the status quo. So many stops along this trip were political: Harry commented on present-day hunger crisis across the globe when he was visiting the Famine Memorial. Foreign aid and intervention are political issues….and so on.

    A more interesting conversation for the British and Anglophiles to have is whether any member of royalty, his and her position so utterly and thoroughly dependent on the patriarchy and the current class system for its very existence, can plausibly support women’s rights or the rights of the oppressed. But that’s a whole other can of worms…..

  16. Ginger says:

    She’s still an actress. Every day she has to act like these appearances aren’t boring AF.

  17. BaBaDook says:

    Ugh, to give you some Irish context the right wingers who opposed the referendum here in Ireland (no voters) have now grabbed on to this whole debacle to have a go. Like Meghan’s stance even matters – I mean that respectfully, the Yes side won so why they’re still banging on, I have no idea.

  18. Vogue says:

    Can someone please remind me what political gaffes has Prince William made? I thought he was one that was usually good with keeping his political opinions to himself

    • notasugarhere says:

      Political or gaffes in general off the top of my head?

      Criticizing the increasing population in “Africa” as destroying the environment – while he and his wife were expecting a third child.

      Visited an elephant “sanctuary” where the elephants are beaten behind the scenes after he was publicly warned in the newspaper not to go there.

      Using his public time with Obama to talk about baby genitalia.

      Publicly talking to a diplomat about how he hopes that diplomat isn’t looking into William’s bedroom window at KP.

      Publicly announcing he was going to destroy ever piece of ivory in the Royal Collection, because dimmest bulb is too dim to understand the Royal Collection doesn’t belong to him personally.

      Publicly making anti-Brexit comments before the referendum.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @Notasugarhere

        You’re *really* not a fan of the Cambridges, are you? :D

      • Vogue says:

        Prince William has never commented on brexit. He made a speech one time to a group of young diplomats about nations needing to unite, but the word Europe was never mentioned so you can’t say it was about brexit.

        The author mentioned political gaffes specifically, and none of what you mentioned (apart from brexit which is incorrect) constitutes a political gaffe.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Britain always being “an outward-looking nation” with “a long and proud tradition of seeking out allies and partners.” “in an increasingly turbulent world, our ability to unite in common action with other nations is essential.” – said by William at an EU summit in Brussels in the midst of the lead up to the Brexit vote. The words EU, Brexit, Europe don’t need to be in there for people to consider those political statements.

        His office ended up having to issue a statement about how it wasn’t a political statement – because the press and people in attendance took it as one.

        I consider inappropriate conversations with world leaders, messing up regarding the elephant sanctuary when he was on a tear about ivory, condemning other people for having children while he and wife were on kid #3, and the statements about the ivory in the Royal Collection all to be political gaffes.

      • Vogue says:

        William did not make this comment at an EU summit in Brussels. He was addressing young diplomats at the foreign office in London. His speech mentioned the commonwealth, UN & Nato. The word Europe was never mentioned so you can’t say his speech was definately about brexit.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Vogue she proved you wrong. It is fine to like William but he has said things. You asked for examples and they were given. How about his disastrous comments about hunting big game in Africa? And yes that is a political issue.
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3489591/Calamity-William-courtiers-won-t-say-no-Revealed-REAL-reason-workshy-Prince-keeps-blundering-one-public-relations-gaffe-another.html

      • S91 says:

        He made that speech at the FO. As usual, the idiot Brexiteers jumped all over it. I bet none of them said a word when the Queen publicly spoke about Brexit.

      • Vogue says:

        @magnoliarose I asked specifically for political gaffes. My understanding of a political gaffe is when a person wrongly comments on government policies or directly interferes in government affairs. I accept like all royals William has made some gaffes, but no one has supplied me with any credible evidence of him commenting on government policies.

        For the record I am actually against royals wading into political matters.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If an elected official had made those comments, they’d be considered political. As William will one day be the unelected head of state, I consider those comments to be political.

      • Addie says:

        You forgot to mention how William referred to Commonwealth dignatories in ‘fancy dress’ when they were wearing their national attire. Hugely insulting and condescending to members of the Commonwealth. Political gaffe. Plus rude from a complete plonker.

        William, unelected, has access to high-level Government papers and decision-making even now, as does his father and obviously, the Queen. He should be under extreme levels of scrutiny, if only because he is paid from the public purse. He is accountable. I am more concerned than anyone who is unelected has such access and is line for more.

      • lsb says:

        NOTA, Not a single one of those is political anything. The ivory threads are conservation straight up, and something the Charles and William (and Harry) champion albeit imperfectly.

        As for the statement about ivory, there is a long – too long – a series of arguments why ivory stocks should be destroyed (or otherwise devalued). Several African heads, not to mention CITES itself, has come out petitioning for “devaluing” (basically not allowing any trading) – the stumbling blocks have been Europe and SA with the UK recently declared as the single worst offender (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/campaigns/GiantsClub/europe-must-choose-elephants-or-ivory-a8258556.html and https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/10/uk-named-as-worlds-largest-legal-ivory-exporter).

        I hope the Royal Family will destroy their “stockpiles” of ivory.

        Any elected figure with those comments … actually several of them including Gove, Johnson (even Gove an Johnson!) not to mention various Lib Dems have made similar overtures. It needs to become “political” – not just here in the UK but in Europe and frankly, with recent reversals in the USA, in the USA too. The elephants are lost in the wild otherwise.

        & His “Brexit speech” wasn’t a Brexit speech at all. How you can address diplomats and diplomacy without saying glad-words like “unity”, “allies”, “partners” is beyond comprehension – the alternative is speeches from jokers like Trump and Johnson which – surely you don’t propose as a remedy.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They are all political comments, ones that caused rows when they happened.

      • lsb says:

        Colombia losing to England, Belgium to France, or Russia to Croatia in the recent World Cup caused rows … didn’t make any of them a political event.

        Controversial and political aren’t the same thing. Most of these events are about using soft power as opposed to policy to wring change. Perhaps not always right, but certainly not political.

  19. Becks1 says:

    I am sure she misses both being an actress and Suits itself – her friends on the set, her life in Toronto, etc. It’s normal to miss something when it ends or you move on, even if it was completely your choice – it doesn’t mean you aren’t happy in your current life.

    And considering KP made a point of highlighting the fact that she considers her a feminist on her profile page, I don’t think anyone over there is batting an eye that Meghan is “pleased” at the results of the referendum.

  20. Mego says:

    For the love of heaven re the abortion referendum. It was the person’s impression that Meghan was pleased with the result. She didn’t quote her saying she was happy about it. It was someone giving an impression turned into Meghan expressing a political opinion. It was supposed to be a private conversation too before idiot took to twitter. It will be another lesson in discretion for Meghan walking the protocol minefield but it certainly is being blown wayout of proportion. Of course crossing her legs is being made to be a huge deal too by media wanting more clicks…

  21. Litiel says:

    She might be nostalgic. It’s normal.
    At least she won’t be an aging actress who was mildly successful during her peak and the most famous actresses all struggles during the transition phase! So at least she escaped the early mid-life crisis.
    Having said that I wonder how much those who marry into the BRF miss the old times.

  22. Vogue says:

    The royals can’t have it both ways. They get pampered by the state in exchange for their impartiality. Unlike politicians the royals are unelected individuals who have been put in a position of immense privilege that was not earned by their own merit. So what right do they have to interfere in political matters. What happens if they express a view that is unpopular or that many people disagree with, where is the accountability?

    The monarch is there to be a unifying force for the nation which is why they have to remain politically neutral. And if they don’t like it they can always give up their privileged position & become private citizens.

  23. themummy says:

    It is absurd that this is even a story. She was making small talk in passing, not making profound statements about her inner regrets to some random person out of nowhere. And like someone else said, missing the cast and crew and feeling nostalgic are different from regretting leaving acting or the show (ALSO, you can miss something and still be happy with the decision not to do it anymore. That’s part of life. My god..). Good freaking lord, people pick apart every single word.

  24. Gigi LaMoore says:

    I think it comes across a bit demeaning to say “well, it’s not like she is Grace Kelly” or other such comments of how she was a minor celebrity or not a Hollywood star. She was a working, independent woman performing a job that at one time she loved. There are women who are cleaning ladies that are passionate about what they do. Are you going to demean them too?

  25. Jessica says:

    Kate and Meg going to Wimbledon to watch Serena and chat with players and ballboys/girls. I’m ready for the commentary.

  26. Honey bear says:

    Surely, she can find a decent bra!

    • RoyalBree says:

      I don’t think it was the bra per se. That gorgeous dress was simply too tight. One size bigger plus some lining, and the problem would be solved. We should never have to see the full undergarment outlines of a royal. I just don’t get this embarrassing mistake. Surely a quick look in the mirror would tell anyone this dress doesn’t fit properly? I hope we never see it again.

  27. Sv says:

    I doubt Meghan made a statement in support of the referendum. This is a woman who prepares and reads her briefing material as many people commented about Meghan’s knowledge of them on this trip as well as previous engagements. What the former UN Ambassador for Women’s Political Participation likely did is address that aspect and express support for was the very high level of women’s political involvement surrounding the referdum. Which is objectively true and can be expressed without endorsing the referendum result as well. Meghan’s support of gender equality has already been cleared by the highest levels of the Royal family. It’s trickier line to walk, but not much different from the support of environmental causes by the Royal family.

  28. Lizabeth says:

    I think the definition of “political speech” can change pretty easily depending on who is being judged. Even conservation efforts in Africa have political aspects don’t they?

    Are all members of the BRF “prohibited” from discussing politics or does the law apply only to the ruling monarch? I always thought it was the latter (although it can see it might be awkward if members of the family speak out)

    Certainly Charles has often mentioned political issues. And often those have been undecided issues unlike the Irish referendum.

    • S91 says:

      Whenever Charles wades into political territory, there is always a backlash, and rightly so.

      • Lizabeth says:

        Rightly so for what reason @S91? Preference by the public or the media for no politics from the BRF? Or because of the specifics of what Charles says? Or does the law cover all the relatives of the ruling monarch and their spouses, instead of just the monarch? I’ve never been able to get an answer to this question so if anyone knows….

      • Masamf says:

        Not always. Recently him and his youngest son did a radio Q&A discussion that focused on environmental conservation etc. This is a huge political subject regardless of who you ask. But nobody got on either PoW or Harry’s case regarding this. Except for the reporters that complained that Charles won’t let them ask any questions but will only allow Harry because Harry has his back and will never ask hard questions, nobody complained beyond that. And nobody criticized him for getting political. Not even the people that are going on and on about and criticizing Meghan being pleased about results of an already decided referendum.

  29. PodyPo says:

    I believe Meghan’s comment meant she missed certain aspects of working on Suits and being an actress, not that she regrets her current life.

    Recently I listed a handbag for sale that I had only used once. A woman contacted me about details, then said “I will have to ask my husband.” I was floored! I’ve been single for a number of years and it was a shock to me to hear a woman say she had to ask permission to buy a handbag. Mixed in there, however, was a slight bit of nostalgia about having a partner and making joint decisions in life.

    I think we can have mixed feelings about things, and it’s not all black and white.

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Use the "Report this comment as spam or abuse" link to ask the moderators to delete a comment if it's offensive. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please e-mail cbcomments at gmail.com to get it retrieved.

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

Leave a comment