Duchess Meghan’s trousers will permanently damage the monarchy or something


Meghan Markle and Prince Harry

One of the first post-engagement appearances Meghan Markle made was attending the Endeavor Awards as Prince Harry’s date on February 1. Meghan wore a crisp black Alexander McQueen trouser suit and a smart white blouse. She looked amazing. Meghan wore trousers for several appearances during the engagement, but in her two months of marriage, Meghan has mostly been wearing skirts and dresses. She still lets us know, every now and then, that she still enjoys some trousers. But you can tell that she’s been trying to “follow protocol” and NOT wear trousers that often, which FYI: isn’t really protocol, it’s just the Queen’s preference. Well, anyway, the Daily Mail claims that Harry has shut down Meghan’s plans to wear a lot of suits while they’re in Australia in a few months.

The Mail on Sunday understands that Prince Harry, perhaps sailing towards dangerous marital waters, has expressed his views over his wife’s latest test of Royal convention after she ordered a range of designer suits – and even a tuxedo – to wear during their October trip. Although Meghan’s penchant for cigarette trousers and stylish flares has won her fashion plaudits since she began official duties, the style is said to be barely tolerated by Royal aides, who want her to stick to the traditional demure skirts and opaque tights. And Harry, who has been sitting in on some of Meghan’s meetings at Kensington Palace with ‘special projects teams’ from various designers, is said to have given the thumbs-down to a masculine Stella McCartney tuxedo suit his wife picked out for a glitzy evening event during the tour.

This newspaper has been told that Meghan has been expressing frustration with some of the monarchy’s archaic traditions. It is the latest sign that Meghan, for all the duties and conventions of her new life as a Royal, is determined to remain her own woman. And it is enough to have sparked a debate among courtiers over her penchant for wearing trousers on Royal occasions.

Though the tuxedo look is undeniably sharp and stylish, and would flatter Meghan’s yoga-honed figure, we understand that even Harry agrees it would be a bridge too far to wear a trouser suit to an important Commonwealth occasion. The final say, of course, ultimately comes from the Queen – who is said to be uneasy at the sight of women wearing any trousers other than jodhpurs. It might also, perhaps, be a reminder of fashion rebellions by Harry’s late mother, Princess Diana.

A source from one of the fashion teams that has visited Kensington Palace in recent weeks said: ‘Meghan is being told she needs to stop dressing like a Hollywood star and start dressing like a Royal. Meghan wanted to wear a tuxedo-style suit but Harry said it wasn’t traditional enough.’

The Mail on Sunday understands it is not the first time there has been friction over the Duchess’s fashion choices. Ahead of one recent public occasion, Meghan was informed by the Queen’s dresser, Angela Kelly, that Her Majesty would be wearing a hat – and that she was expected to do the same. The Duchess, however, left her hair uncovered.

[From The Daily Mail]

If I was in Meghan’s place, this would be the trouser-suited hill I would die on as well. I love pants, trousers, slacks, suits, what have you. I haven’t wore a skirt above the knee in years. But in my case, it’s because I know my legs are not my best feature. Meghan has great legs though, and she looks amazing in skirts and dresses. AND trousers. And if she prefers to mix it up with suits and skirts and the full range of clothing options, who really gives a sh-t? I mean, honestly. I still don’t believe that the Queen is nitpicking Meghan like this. Maybe the Queen’s PEOPLE are nitpicking her, but I just don’t think the Queen cares to this extent. As for Harry… dude needs to pick his battles.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry

Endeavour Fund Awards Ceremony

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

240 Responses to “Duchess Meghan’s trousers will permanently damage the monarchy or something”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jess says:

    Jesus now this woman is being criticised for wearing pants? What next? The color of her hair? Oh wait she’s also being criticised for that too for not being blond like Harry’s ex girlfriends. I’m so over these dumb protocols people are making just to bring this woman down. If get it if it was work wise, but these are literally dumb things to criticise about.

    • Milla says:

      How about she works for like two or three years and then start wearing whatever. I cannot feel sorry for her about fashion restrictions, this is brf. Kate cannot wear cozy shoes during pregnancy. And she’s been with them for a while now.

      I don’t know if the story is true, but it’s in all papers, including fashion magazines. So who knows

      • Leyton says:

        @Milla

        What are you going on about?

        None of this stuff is true. There are literally a ton of other example about British Royal woman who have worn pants to a number of events. There is no rule on it and no actual dress code outside of probably events with the Queen or special occasions which is reasonable for anyone. Every day engagements? Not applicable.

        They are nitpicking and trying to make Meghan some “other” who is being pushed into a box but it’s not true. The fact that they are using Harry, a man who literally recycles the same blue suit and brown shoes for nearly every single event, as someone so harsh on her about her clothing is pretty pathetic.

        Kate can wear what she wants in the shoe departments. No one was forcing into heels.

        Get real.

      • Natalie S says:

        Kate is not required to wear heels. She chooses to do that. Diana wore flats all the time.

        There’s nothing wrong with wearing trousers. I don’t believe the Queen cares and Meghan needs to be firm about her boundaries because people absolutely will seek to extinguish her spirit while pretending the problem is Meghan somehow not quite fitting in.

      • Milla says:

        Leyton
        Kate cannot wear her wedges around the queen.
        I was pointing out that Meg should just do what she’s told until she settles into their royal routine. Diana or Sophie, even Fergie, they were acting as kittens during their first years. Follow the example.

      • Natalie S says:

        @Milla. First you said cozy shoes during pregnancy and now it’s wedges around the Queen.

        Can you think of an occasion where Meghan has worn trousers around Liz? And there is no protocol banning her from wearing trousers or even jeans while working.

        Meghan has done very well in her work duties so far. And all this while being harassed by her father and half-sister. She is toeing the line and being respectful and the press seems to have invented rules to find something for her to mess up.

      • Leigh-Klein says:

        @ Natalie S. Diana didn’t “wear flats all the time”, she just didn’t wear 4-inch pumps all the time.

      • Natalie S says:

        True. Not literally 100% of the time.

      • Missy says:

        There are several photos of the Queen wearing trousers at events. I wish people would stop making up protocols that don’t exist.

      • magnoliarose says:

        This all goes back to pretend protocols that never existed that suddenly exist in the minds of people for whatever reason.

      • perplexed says:

        “Diana wore flats all the time.”

        Oddly enough, that was so she wouldn’t look taller than Charles.

        She was doing what Nicole Kidman did — trying not to tower over her husband (even though Charles is a lot taller than Tom Cruise). Kate doesn’t have that problem to deal with in William since he got the Spencer height and is so tall already; therefore, her shoe options are wide open.

        Diana was taller than all of the men she met. She was probably trying not to tower over Henry Kissinger, either. And yet even in flats she was taller than all of the male celebrities she met. I can’t recall anyone actually looking taller than her — other than maybe the Australian swim team, and even then she seemed equal to them in height without heels.

      • Milla says:

        Wedges, platforms, are more comfortable and healthier for your spine than flats or heels. Hence i said wedges, height around 4, 5 cm.

        Im not after Meghan, but what’s one pair of trousers if the queen says no. She married her grandson. She is going to represent the Queen in Australia and if her advisors say dress, wear a dress. Why are we making a big deal? Its work dress code for Meg, for now.

      • fredsmother says:

        @Milla Have you not seen Kate in Jeggings???? I have seen her in pants so tight on official duty, you could have almost seen the future heirs and spares.

        Wear your pants Duchess Meghan. They are professional, suitable and flattering.

      • Natalie S says:

        Kate nearly fell over in her wedges in Australia. There are also picture of her needing help during I think the Olympics because it was a sporting event. She commonly wears 4″and 5″ wedges.

        When she left the hospital during her pregnancy with George and still looked unsteady on her feet, she wore flat boots.

        Do you really believe she has her choice of footwear dictated to her during her pregnancies?

        There is no rule about trousers. Meghan isn’t being stubborn because there’s nothing for Meghan to be stubborn about.

      • CeeCee Dee says:

        Natalie S. – Diana often wore flats because she and Prince Charles were the same height. If she wore a 4-inch heel, she towered over him.

        Supposedly, the Queen doesn’t like wedges, but I think a lot of these reports (including the above trouser one) are grossly exaggerated. The veto of the tuxedo is probably the only truth here.

      • Nic919 says:

        It is pure bs to say that heels and wedges are better for your feet than flats. It is quite the opposite. Bunions are caused by wearing heels and your calf muscles can shrink as well. There is a reason why people with ankle fractures or the elderly stop wearing heels and it is because they are horrible for your feet. There is also a huge difference in the health of women’s feet when you compare those who have worn heels very often and those who have not. That comment was akin to a Dump gaslighting comment about Russia not interfering with the election.

      • Doc says:

        “This comment was akin to Dump gaslighting…” Are you serious?

        Why bring American politics and their chosen president into this?

        Milla, be careful you don’t disagree with the main idea on the comment thread, you’ll be accused of voting for Trump, even though you’re not in the US. 🙄🙄

    • dot says:

      Meghan is a big girl. If she isn’t wearing pants it is because she either doesn’t want to wear pants or is fine to just go along with BRF rules/preferences (whatever you want to call them). I am 100% confident that Meghan can make decisions for herself and if there are some things she doesn’t get to decide… well, she knew what she was signing up for. Maybe Meghan feels beautiful in the dresses/suits she has chosen? Maybe Harry requests that she wears dresses because he finds her beautiful in those dresses? None of us will ever know what goes on behind the scenes. Meghan has shown time and again that she is confident and strong. I don’t think there really is an issue here at all.

      • minx says:

        Thank you.
        If I had the luxuries and perks that these people enjoy, I wouldn’t care what I wore. It would be “Jump? How high?”
        Requests to wear pantyhose, certain shoes, or skirts—if this is indeed happening—isn’t exactly like working on a chain gang.

      • CeeCee says:

        Really. If Meghan has a dress code, I’m sure she gets it. She had on on Suits, right??
        And I don’t care if she wears pants or a skirt – what caught my attention was her ordering “a range of designer suits.” More bespoke for humanitarian Meghan? Come on, girl! Try to at least ACT like you are humanitarian minded. And sorry, bespoke outfit after bespoke outfit, 30K for 2 days in Ireland is not how any humanitarian I have ever seen dresses while on duty.

      • Natalie S says:

        What does bespoke mean to people? If Meghan ordered looks from different designers, do people think she shouldn’t have the suits tailored? Because ordering something from a designer doesn’t equal bespoke. Tailoring doesn’t equal bespoke. How do we know if the suit is bespoke until we see it.

        Couture is another word I see being thrown around. Couture has to do with how the garment is constructed not that it’s tailored to the person’s measurements and from a fashion house.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Since when does being a humanitarian mean someone has to dress in rags? Audrey Hepburn, Angelina Jolie, Princess Diana are just examples of people who do/did good works but liked fashion.
        @ Natalie S
        Couture and bespoke are thrown around incorrectly constantly. It is like she isn’t supposed to have nice things. I think they ALL overspend but singling her out is ridiculous.

    • RoyalBree says:

      Crazy stupid if she’s getting flack for wearing pants! I disagree that she has great legs — she has tiny bird legs. And for that very reason she looks fantastic in pants, as long as the hems are not dragging an inch on the ground. Here’s to many more well-tailored and hemmed pants outfits!

  2. Jane says:

    Dear God, they are going to complain about every detail concerning her, aren’t they? She looks stunning. Case closed.

  3. Eleonor says:

    Sorry nope, while she has all my sympathy for her famewhore family,she knew who she was marrying.
    As her husband once said: The Queen is their boss, if HM has preferences they must deal with them.

    • Natalie S says:

      You think the Queen would have immediately done something about Kate, Sophie and Camilla wearing trousers or trouser-like garments if she felt that sttongly about it.

      Or this story is nonsense. But interesting that people are so quick to believe it. Very interesting.

      • Missy says:

        People believe what they want to believe especially when it’s something negative about a person they don’t like.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I know. These fake protocols are something else.

      • Milla says:

        We do not know if it’s true.

        But if it was… It wouldn’t be Queen’s idea, but her advisors’. Why? I don’t know, but if i represented a company in overseas trip I’d wear what i was expected.

      • Natalie S says:

        First, I think it”s dumb to give any creedence to assuming this is true because it makes no sense. No other Royal woman has been held to this.

        Second, in general I don’t think it’s a good idea to let yourself be dictated to if your peers aren’t held to the same rules and your advisors can’t explain any logic to their advice . Meghan is there to be an asset to the Royal Family not mindlessly obedient servant.

        Third, it’s a made up story! She has done very well in carrying out her duties so far while being under enormous pressure. They’re making up rules so they can claim she’s screwing up. That’s why this story and this rule makes no sense and has no logical consistency.

      • CeeCee says:

        When has Kate worn trousers on official duties? Especially overseas? I don’t remember even one time when she wore trousers, except that hike to the monastery in India.
        This isn’t racist. This isn’t “poor Meghan.” She married into one of the most traditional institutions in the world!! To compare it to advice from an employment firm is not a valid comparison.
        Let’s stop the poor poor Meghan silliness.

      • Lizabeth says:

        @Ceecee. Kate wore what I would call jeggings, some might call trousers, at least twice, maybe three times during the last trip to Canada.

    • minx says:

      I don’t necessarily believe this particular DM story as presented (shocking, I know). But I do think if there ever WAS any discussion about her wardrobe Meghan would simply do whatever they asked of her. She’s smart and she wants to do well, and she’s not going to battle the BRF on any suggestions they make. She knows the drill. So, I will assume the BRF likes what she wears, and if for some reason they didn’t, they would tell her so and she would ditch it. It’s not the big deal the DM is making it. Of course.

    • KD says:

      I agree. And people will quickly believe anything that goes with their line of thinking. If it is from the DM and about Kate, it’s believable. With Meghan, it’s all fake news lol. This came from People in the beginning, so I think its partly true.

      • Natalie S says:

        People will believe something that goes with their line of thinking. Like somehow it’s okay for Sophie, Camilla, the Queen herself, and Kate to wear trousers but not Meghan.

        I think if I had to look for some speck of truth, maybe Harry didn’t want both of them to go to an event in a tuxedo look but we may still see Meghan in the outfit when she eventually has a solo evening event.

        But I think the trousers not being royal protocol or traditional enough isn’t true. And it is disheartening that so many people in the general comments went straight to how Meghan needs to do as she’s told and not make waves.

    • KD says:

      “Meghan is there to be an asset to the Royal Family not mindlessly obedient servant.!”

      Oh, you’re naive.

      • Natalie S says:

        That’s a new one and time will tell.

        I admit I didn’t think Kate would be able create as many changes as she did. Charles and Camilla got married and I think the odds are good Camilla will be titled as Queen.

        I think a lot of people feel quite entitled to Meghan being obedient and quiet. And I think they will be disappointed. I have faith in someone who can make through the gauntlet of coming from the Markle family, beat the considerable odds to become a working actress, and carry out her duties with poise while being openly harassed in the media in such vile ways.

  4. TheHeat says:

    It’s my understanding that the only time the ‘no pants protocol’ is really looked at is for events in which the Queen, herself, will also be in attendance.
    Also, I call b.s. on most of this. If the Queen’s staff wanted Meghan to dress a certain way at the behest of the Queen, I doubt that Meghan would thumb her nose at that and not comply. It’s just clothes, fgs. The UK press is trying to plant seeds of dissent and conflict between Meghan and the Royal Family, and it’s so transparent and silly.

    • Becks1 says:

      Agreed. I think if the Queen said to Harry, I want Meghan in a ball gown and tiara for X event, Meghan isn’t going to say NUH UH QUEEN I DO WHAT I WANT!

      Meghan knows when she is working she is representing the crown and not herself. She’s not dumb. She knows how to pick her battles.

      I also really don’t think the queen cares what she wears as long as it is roughly appropriate (and so far, everything has been.)

    • DizzyLizzy says:

      ^^ THIS.

      Do you really think any courtier would risk their pay check by allowing this to get to the DailyFail of all people.

      The DailyFail make up stories ALL THE TIME.

      They have tried to get to Meghan via her family with no luck so they have moved on to the old tactic of making up stories to stir up the comments section thereby forcing KP to issue a statement, which it WILL NEVER DO BTW.

      It is also a way of controlling the narrative of what Meghan wears by creating a media storm that should not exist and forcing Meghan and her dressers to act diplomatically by forcing her to wear skirts.

      If we see Meg only wear skirts in autralia then they will feel vindicated and continue to make up other stupid stories to trap her along with trying to destroy her already dysfunctional family and control other narratives in her life.

      They really seem to have it in for her. For them it is a simple case of being able to say it wouldn’t have worked anyway, she doesn’t belong for all the obvious reasons they will never spell out.

      They have a brand new shiny play thing and they are not letting up.

      HM Queen was right to sack the old PR guys, they probably wanted to ignore the fact that Meg was bi-racial and refused to acknowledge the targeted behaviour of the media towards her. H&M need some heavyweight PR who can cultivate her image and not have her go the way of Kate which the media are desperately trying to manipulate so they can have a real laugh at her expense and then criticise her for being dowdy…..

      • Nic919 says:

        The no pants during Commonwealth tour stuff is nonsense. There are tons of pictures of royal women wearing them including Kate wearing jeggings for a few events in Canada. This is completely made up. And there is no way Harry is interfering. In fact you can see that Harry’s style has improved since Meghan has been around because he doesn’t wear the same ratty casual outfits and he has more stylish suits.

      • KD says:

        “Do you really think any courtier would risk their pay check by allowing this to get to the DailyFail of all people.”

        People need to kinda stop with the evil shaming of DM because Royals/courtiers leak through the DM all the time and have done for ages. It’s a disgusting rag but they use it nonetheless.

    • Bridget says:

      Wait, you don’t think Harry actually put his foot down because suits aren’t traditional enough ?!? Lol.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The Queen wears trouser. Anne wears trousers. Sophie wears trousers. Camilla wears trousers There is not rule or preference of “no trousers”.

  5. adastraperaspera says:

    Is there really any friction, or are the stories made up? She’s an actress, and surely she understood the role she was going to play.

  6. Belluga says:

    If every single thing Meghan does isn’t against protocol, why do royal reporters keep insisting it is? ;-)

    The recent one I enjoyed was a complaint about Meghan wearing sunglasses at Wimbledon being against a protocol that someone had made up on the spot. Not only are there countless photographs of other royals wearing sunglasses, Saint Kate was wearing sunglasses on the same day, at the same event, at the same time, while sitting next to Meghan!

    She looks great in trousers and very professional. I’d much rather a sharp suit when she’s working than a frilly dress.

    • DizzyLizzy says:

      It’s plain and simple. They know it’s not against protocol. But seeing as she is doing such a great job, what else can they pick her up on?

      So they make up the stories.

      They are however digging their own grave.

      All the independent Royal Commentators are beginning to call them out on it, even Victoria Arbiter used the F-Word in a recent post out of sheer frustration over this made up story.

      I think Meghan’s presence is great, bc finally everyone sees the hustle of being a WOC on the world stage and the unfair criticism which you inevitably face just for existing in “their world”.

      This poor girl is being targeted and harassed by her family, the media and even idiots on social media who are eating up all the drama made up around her.

      They so wanted Cressida or Chelsy and when they couldn’t have them they are now spilling their wrath.

      • IlsaLund says:

        The barrage won’t stop and will probably increase. Whatever it takes to “bring her down and put her in her place.” They’ll continue to attack her from all sides trying to find a weak spot and drive a wedge between her and Harry. It’s frightening to see how unhinged this has made the media, her family and her haters. I pray Meghan and Harry have a long and happy marriage….the best revenge for all this utter nonsense.

      • DizzyLizzy says:

        @IlsaLund – it won’t stop but with good PR they can control more of the narrative. Thank God the Queen sacked the old press pack. Even Charles and Andrew wanted them gone as they were so crusty and behind the times.

        They need to get a team into the palace well versed with race issues who are not afraid to address those issues subtly and head on.

        It would be a good example to the rest of the world if they show they will not tolerate the b*llshit and harassment and re-shape the media currently have in their racist over-tones towards meghan.

        Enough.

      • CeeCee says:

        How is Meghan “doing a great job”? She works, what, once a week, in absurdly expensive bespoke clothes, and has made pretty basic mistakes such as turning her back to the queen and commenting on abortion.
        The bar is low for Meghan around here, isn’t it?? Sad!

      • notasugarhere says:

        She did 28 events during their engagement period to Kate’s 5. She’s two months in to the job officially and doing more than Kate did at the same time. And please don’t start on the Malta Lie, they weren’t full-time royals BS.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I’d rather see her in lovely pant suits than floaty skirts with no hem weights that with a gust of wind shows off what god gave her. Katie Keen never really got ripped about that.

      • Levin says:

        She gets ripped all the time for it, actually, just not in the papers, because it last happened years ago. Meanwhile, a whole slew of other royal ladies, including the Queen (British and otherwise), have had their hems fly up during engagements as well.

        Obviously wearing pants is fine, pretty much every royal lady has worn them, the headlines are all just clickbait. They have to try and keep up the boom in readership the wedding gave them.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Dozens of incidents over seven years. One of the most memorable being flashing her bare ass at the Gandhi memorial in 2016 and the silly ‘look at me’ neckline during the Spain state visit. It is brought up because it happens repeatedly, and has been her pattern of behavior since she was in her early teens.

        Once is an accident. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a choice or pattern.

    • magnoliarose says:

      They just throw red meat to people who don’t want to admit what their real problem is with Meghan. It gives them some cover to be racist loons without feeling like they are.

      • Avery says:

        Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! That is exactly what this is.

      • SlightlyAnonny says:

        This for all the wins. Harry’s Love Shield (TM Laineygossip) took race off the table so they think they’re being subtle by literally picking at every.other.aspect.of.her.existence. As if people of color haven’t been dealing with this exact type of crap for millenia. We see you, bigots. We see you.

      • CeeCee says:

        Why is this racist? Every member of the BRF has rules to follow. Every single one. If Meghan didn’t like the rules, why marry Harry?
        I think Meghan understands what she married into and has certainly seemed “obedient” so far, except for the abortion comment. So to talk about her as if she is some great feminist fighting for a tuxedo while wearing 10k worth of clothes on one of her weekly work duties? It is astonishing how little you all expect from her and the excuses you all make for her.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @CeeCee
        Why does it bother you what other people think or feel about her? I can’t stand certain celebrities but I don’t get upset when other people do. That is strange to me.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @CeeCee
        Why does it bother you what other people think or feel about her? I can’t stand certain celebrities but I don’t get upset when other people like them. They don’t need to justify their tastes to anyone else.

  7. Reese says:

    Why can’t she just do her job and wear what is expected of her? Most of us have to suck it up 9-5, 5 days a week to conform to what is expected. She isn’t a Hollywood star anymore. She will look beautiful in anything regardless.

    • Becks1 says:

      But that’s part of the point. she IS doing her job and what is expected of her and she IS conforming when necessary.

      Wearing trousers =/= not conforming. Trousers to work events are not “that” uncommon in the royal family. Kate just usually wears dresses or skirts to engagements unless they are sports-oriented (not always, but usually.) and that’s fine for Kate. But it doesn’t mean its required.

    • Jasmine18 says:

      ITA Reese. I don’t care if MM wears trousers or not but if the Daily Mail are printing rubbish, there’s no need for all this pearl clutching on Meghan’s behalf.

      She knew what she was marrying into. She can wear trousers in her down time. It’s not a huge sacrifice in the grand scheme of things and I seriously doubt many DM readers care either.

      Is it really a surprise to people on CB that this is what the British press does? It’s not even personal to Meghan, just a desperate attempt at printing something, anything, about a glamorous new member of the royal family to fill column inches.

      The phrase ‘Suck it up, Buttercup’ comes to mind.

      • KD says:

        True. She can wear trousers in her downtime when she isn’t working. They only show up for half an hour or so anyway. If they think she should wear a dress for a formal evening occasion instead of a trouser suit, whats the big deal?? This “leak” was specifically talking about a formal event, not an everyday normal engagement. It makes sense that they would want her to wear a lovely gown.

      • CeeCee says:

        I had a job on Wall Street. Not only was I not allowed to wear trousers, I had to wear a skirt and jacket suit every day. Hose also. There is still a dress code like this for banks and brokerage firms.
        Boo hoo. They paid better than any other jobs in Manhattan. So I wore a skirt and jacket. You do what you have to in order to get the perks you get.

      • Dixiebells says:

        @ceecee I would be shocked if those dress codes held up if any banks or brokerages were sued over them. Gender identity and expression are employment protected classes in the state of New York. Meaning your employer may not dictate what you wear along gender based guidelines. (I.e. a skirt)

  8. merrit says:

    I get that the queen has preferences but JFC. Is this for real? I hope she wears nothing but pants from here on out. Also, screw Harry if this is a legit story.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      @ Merrit

      When I read the story yesterday (don’t remember what paper), I got the impression they were taking a “Harry runs the relationship” slant. At the time, I thought maybe they were trying to combat the creeping narrative that Harry is a wuss and Meghan mothers him……

      Of course, that’s also one of Samantha’s major attack points (….yes….I know…) but I’ve noticed a few other rags have started pushing a similar narrative as well, eg the daily express. They have an article out, where they call him a “SOFTY” or something similar.

      Anyway, it just made me wonder if it was a vague pr attempt to push that back a little against that.

      • Belluga says:

        I got more of an impression that they were trying to hint that ‘Harry’s getting sick of uppity Meghan who doesn’t know her place’.

      • magnoliarose says:

        The DM is extremely patriarchial in their coverage. They are always trying to paint thoughtful or sensitive men as weak and bullies and sexists as strong. They purposely use headlines like “Hot X shows off slim figure” when the actress is normal bodied with cellulite just to make people attack her in the comments. So while they are obviously racists they are also toxic to women in general.
        They aren’t going to stand for enlightened relationships where the partners are equal. There is always a slant to it. Women who tow the line get rewarded with more positive coverage but women who don’t are savaged.

    • DizzyLizzy says:

      @Belluga – agreed

      Meghan has the sort of personally that rubs some people up the wrong way.

      She is outspoken, confident, classy and well put together, This woman managed a career and curated her own social media before joining the BRF. She is no deer stuck in the headlights.

      The press and your average middle-englander wife hate people like her.

      They have been trying to take her down for a hot minute and are desperately failing. When all they can personally criticise her for is made up stories then you know the desperation runs deep.

  9. Peg says:

    Honestly, I don’t think Harry cares what Meghan wears.

  10. Gaby says:

    I kinda doubt Harry would do this. I mean, he might give her tips ahead of time, like how “official” she should look meating head of states, but he dated her, he knows her style, and if there was anything he wanted to tell her, I believe he could have done then.

    When TQ is around, I do believe that out of respect, she could wear clothes that Liz prefers.

  11. OriginalLala says:

    While I find it laughable that they consider Royal events “work”, nevertheless, you know what looks super professional and work appropriate? A suit. Also trousers, straight skirts…
    It’s so clear these people have no idea what actual professional, working women wear.

    also, the undertone that wearing a suit is somehow not feminine and too masculine is ridiculous, what is this 1952?

    • Nic919 says:

      Sadly yes. I recall people commenting on Hillary wearing a lot of pantsuits as well. Just another way to control women.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      @Original Lala

      Surely, you don’t have to be splitting stones with a sledgehammer for it to be considered work? They might be pampered poodles (as I think Minx likes to call them), but I think it’s a teeny weeny bit unfair to completely discount the work they do.

      They might not be as heroic as nurses who work all hours of the day, or work in physically challenging roles for that matter, but those royal events also impact millions of lives across the UK and world. The few I know of: Sentebale, Prince’s Trust, Duke of Edinburgh awards, Centrepoint, Invictus games etc are all promoted, marketed and sold by “royal events”.

      • Erinn says:

        I have mixed feelings. They do work. I certainly wouldn’t be comfortable having to have such a huge audience watching my every move. It can be incredibly draining to meet person after person and remain super engaged and thoughtful regardless of how you’re feeling that specific day.

        But at the same time – I don’t think it’s even just a case of comparing them to nurses who do long shifts and have peoples’ lives to worry about. I’m no nurse. I work 40+ hours a week in an office doing website development. I have strict deadlines that I’m accountable for – I have a lot on my plate at every given moment. I have industry standards that are constantly changing – I spend a lot of time chasing account managers for the information from customers that I need to do my job. I have to fight with the designers to design with responsive websites in mind. I’m working on multiple tasks at once on top of all of that.

        I’m not on my feet with potentially dying patients for 12 hours a day – but I also work very hard and it can be super mentally draining. On top of that, I have chronic migraines and a chronic pain condition, so I’m working under less than desirable circumstances and having to keep up appearances of being happy, and just like everyone else no matter how awful I feel.

        I don’t think it’s even really fair to compare the kind of work Royals do to anyone who’s working a full time job. They have so many staff members to do the legwork for them, to keep them in the loop. They travel a good deal – which is tiring in its self. But most of the engagements that they attend are only a couple of hours in length. Harry did 191 engagements in 2017. I’m working something like (quickly rounded off) 2100+ hours a year minimum. 191 events – we can say they last around 5 hours on average (might be generous because some of the events happen in the same day) and you’d get 955 hours of work. And that’s with so much support from the organizations the events revolve around and staff- and there are often other royals at the events with him. I don’t think it’s quite comparable to someone who is working a full time job that is at least somewhat stressful. He’s also set for life – he doesn’t have to worry TOO much about having a secure living like regular people would.

        Now the Queen who has all eyes on her – managed 292 events in her 90s. I’d say that’s a very fair amount of time invested in working because how many people at her age are doing a regular schedule of events. And Charles and Anne were both at over 540 events – that I can say is a LOT of work and pretty much guaranteed to surpass the hours that I have had to work in a year – and with all the added stress of the public watching you non-stop.

        It’s a hard thing to compare overall. I wouldn’t want their job in a lot of ways. But at the same time – if I only had to show up for a couple hundred events in a year and have the kind of wealth and security that they do in exchange for that – I think it definitely makes up for it.

        That’s about all I have on that topic. I will say I freaking love that outfit of Meghan’s. I think she looks stunning, and kind of badass in a way. I think it’s a nice balance of professional, young, and stylish.

      • perplexed says:

        I think the public scrutiny is what makes their lives difficult.

        But I also think there’s a solution for that — do what Prince Charles does and avoid all stories about yourself. That’s what I would do in their positions.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I think the problem is that the younger royals don’t do enough. They barely clock in part-time hours at this point.
        I had a career that people look at as easy but it wasn’t. The hard part wasn’t visible. I don’t think it is the same for the younger royals though. They have large staffs and don’t seem to really do much when they aren’t in public.

        For me, it was traveling across time zones, zig-zagging 10 times in a week which meant sometimes I was so tired I would just cry. At the same time, it was very very lonely and I missed out on family life events and holidays. Conditions were often uncomfortable and unfriendly. I had to work with temperamental/mean people I would have loved to bitch slap but couldn’t. I had a hard time maintaining romantic relationships because who wants a girlfriend who is never home. Constant harsh, often cruel criticism could lead to moments of extreme self doubt and frustration. I was put in dangerous situations and had to work no matter how sick I was and got no sympathy. I haven’t slept well for consecutive nights since circa 2000. I chose to do it so I accepted the terms but it was the things no one saw that made it hard.

        I think their work is psychologically difficult but not physically challenging. The younger royals should ALL be doing 500 or so appearances a year. Anything less shouldn’t be acceptable. William should be outworking them all but he doesn’t.

      • Enough Already says:

        Magnoliarose
        Fashion model for $500, Alex!
        Hugs for your perseverance. I imagine myself on a turbulent 9 hour flight full of squealing Japanese school girls on a field trip to NYC, with a devastating sinus migraine, having just seen my boyfriend looking wayyy too chummy with one of our mutual friends on fb and just wanting my mommy and my own bed and yeah…hugs to you :)

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Enough Already

        Lol. An unglamourous so called glamourous job. You know what I hated? Chatty Cathys who wouldn’t take hints and would keep on striking up conversations even though an eye mask and a neck pillow are clearly in use.

        I hope you are and your family doing ok during this time. Grief is truly exhausting. Hugs to you too. :)

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ Enough Already

        Add an extra pair of increasingly chunky, hairy arms to Mags’ (group hug!) and an unsolicited, sloppy kiss to your cheek for good measure! :)

        @Erinn:

        Can’t argue with anything you and Magnolia have said at all…..but I”’ll add this: my job requires circa 50% desk, techy time + another 50% client facing time…..client entertainment, meeting and greeting, client development work etc…..and very often, I find the client stuff significantly more challenging and emotionally draining than the techy desk bits.

        Constantly having to be “on”…..remembering all relevant facets of said clients portfolio and needs…..knowing that the slightest slip-up could end the relationship for good, resulting in lots of embarrassment for me and the firm and of course, less $$$ at the end of the day.

        So, I guess I have a little sympathy (not THAT much!) for this sort of work. Its not quite as easy as everybody seems to think it is (is all i’m saying).

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ Erinn

        This reminds me of a time when I had to take a client out for dinner……I had my eye on a lush, fantastic little spanish, seafood restaurant and quickly booked us a table there…..was so busy, I didn’t have time to have breakfast or lunch, so by the end of the day, I was drooling, fantasizing over monkfish and chorizo…..scallops…..the works.

        Only for the client to arrive and announce that she was strictly vegetarian and the sight of flesh made her sick! Arrrrggggggghhhh!!!!! (I had sloppily forgotten to ask her if she had any dietary requirements).

        Of course she insisted we stayed in the restaurant and I had exactly what I wanted, and I was forced to insist in return “Of course not! Let’s order some leaves!”

        We ended up having the vegetarian tapas menu……a spread of olives, peas, green leafy salads etc. (Long, dry, pathetic sigh)…..By the end of the meal, I had to physically restrain myself from knocking her out and jumping on the next table’s spread….they were busy, selfishly tucking into what looked like an assortment of buttery shellfish and my monkfish.

        So yeah…..you don’t have to tell me……this is an extremely poor (and deeply unsympathetic) illustration of my point above, but it hurt my feelings terribly, none the less.

      • CeeCee says:

        @Erinn, add in that each of the events at Invictus counted as an event for Harry, and that the Christenings of their kids counted as events for the Cambridges, and the young royals work a ridiculously tiny amount of time for privileges that few other humans share.
        So much whining for “poor Meghan.” I feel like she is going to become the new “poor Jason.”

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Bells D

        I DO have sympathy for palm pressing and schmoozy events. It isn’t all that fun to look engaged and be on display for long periods of time. I would be the world’s worst socialite even though I am outgoing because it shows on my face when I don’t like someone. lol It takes a herculean effort to get my poker face in place. I often proudly think I did a good job until someone busts me on it.

        As to that client. I would have never announced my eating preferences like that and would have just ordered accordingly without a grand passive aggressive proclamation. The pretty much created an awkward moment. Besides, it was up to her to tell you that her diet is unusual. Vegan/Vegetarianism is known but not assumed. I have a relative by marriage who is Kosher and they tell everyone well in advance so that the other people aren’t made to feel uncomfortable.

  12. hindulovegod says:

    When you’re a expensive, unnecessary anachronism, you may want to avoid things that highlight it. Policing a woman’s clothing options (and hair, tone, car door etiquette!?) is a bad idea. These stories upend the “modern royals” narrative and expose the rotting medieval institution at the core.

    • KD says:

      They never really said they were modern…. Part of the public seemed to have believed that because of Meghan. You can’t modernise monarchy. You’re talking about a family steeped in centuries of tradition, duty, etc . A truly modernised monarchy is an oxymoron.
      I agree with people who say Meghan knew what she was marrying into. I don’t understand the complaints, tbh.

  13. Beth says:

    That’s part of the job, and she must’ve known about it before she married into a royal family. I’m sure plenty of people who have to dress a specific way for work would like to wear something more comfortable, but that’s life.

  14. TheOriginalMia says:

    I don’t believe any of this. Anne and Sophie have worn trousers on tour. Kate has worn her beloved jeggings. This is just more bs to pile on Meghan’s shoulders.

    • Gine says:

      I was just going to say, Sophie wears pantsuits all the time and no one cares. This is all BS made up by the papers because “Meghan broke protocol!” articles are getting them hits.

      • DizzyLizzy says:

        Sophie wore a jumpsuit to Ascot this year and she is HM’s favourite DIL.

        The comments section of the DailyFail were the usual worship and prayer of the local church. Idiotic women kept commenting about how wonderful and modern she looked.

        This has never been about the trousers but rather whom is wearing them.

        Meghan always looks beautiful and controlling her clothes is away of taking her shine away.

        When I see comments from middle aged white women with a certain look themselves saying Meghan ‘homely looking’ it’s clear to me what the intent is.

  15. Melania says:

    There are many pics of Princess Diana in smoking at official events in 1980s.
    This is complete BS

  16. Becks1 says:

    Doesn’t Sophie wear trousers on occasion? and – gasp – even Kate wears trousers or jeans to events. If skinny jeans are appropriate then I’m sure suits like Meghan is wearing are appropriate.

    So basically – there is no “no trousers” rule, and its so tiresome for people to act like there is. Maybe the Queen prefers dresses for herself, but I doubt she enforces that rule across the board.

    And I’m calling BS on the whole “the queen wanted Meghan to wear a hat” thing. The Queen pretty much always wears a hat nowadays. Meghan would have looked silly wearing one that day, considering the events they did, and I’m sure all involved knew it and no one cared. When Meghan “has” to wear a hat, she does (trooping, Ascot, the garden party, etc.)

    Now what I can see is Harry saying “meh” to the tuxedo if he just didn’t like it. I doubt he would have said “you cant wear that” but he may have just not liked it and Meghan probably wants to wear something he likes for big events. I don’t think that’s strange in itself. If Harry said “no you cant wear that because you are BREAKING PROTOCOL” then I would think Meghan would run as fast as she can.

    • Becks1 says:

      Okay I did a quick google search. Lots of images of Sophie in pants at official events. Some more casual than others, and some on tour, but some definitely events to which other royals would wear skirts and she wears skinny cropped trousers, etc. And a lot of those pics are pretty recent.

    • CeeCee says:

      I can see Harry not wanting Meghan to wear a tuxedo to an event. Who really thinks that this rich, entitled white guy who has done nothing to earn his privilege is some kind of progressive or “woke’ guy?? Anyone, really?? Remember what he told Meghan’s father about Trump? I think people might be shocked that the BRF agrees more than disagrees with Trump,but don’t like how crude he is.
      Harry isn’t some feminist guy.

  17. Masamf says:

    Meh, multiple UK tabloids have already de-bunked this nonsensical story that was clearly made up by the Daily Fail.

  18. Enn says:

    I really want a tux after seeing Meghan in the McQueen during their engagement. She looks great in cigarette and slim cut trousers.

    Is this “rule” more for formal evening events where they’ll be representing TQ? And by that I don’t mean written in stone, but more TQ’s preference?

    • KD says:

      Yes, this is how I took it. This rule is for the formal evening receptions/engagements. Everyone on here is getting in a tizzy talking about their everyday engagements!

      What I find really interesting is Harry sitting in on her design team convos! Haha, can you imagine Will doing that? Leave it to the girls, Harry. Why is Harry sitting in on these fashion meetings? If he’s really doing this, I assume there’s a good reason for it. The cost? If it’s not the cost, then they’re both as tone deaf as each other lmao. I’m not sure if its protocol or rules but maybe he wants to make sure that she’s wearing appropriate outfits on the official tour representing the Queen…. like nothing sheer/see-through, etc.

      I think she’ll look fine as long as her skirts/dresses don’t fly up!!

  19. Chris says:

    I think this is a made up story, too. Didn’t we just hear that Meghan had asked Harry to help her pick her looks, that he was her personal stylist or something? The kernel of truth here is that maybe Harry didn’t like one particular Stella McCarthy suit or maybe he didn’t like it for some particular event. Maybe it just didn’t look that good on her? Or maybe she had a dress that looked amazing and he preferred that? The rest of this DailyMail story is just piecing together other bits of information (Queen doesn’t like pants, Meghan’s frustrated with palace rules about contacting her father, etc.) and constructing a faux narrative out of it.

  20. Cerys says:

    If Kate can wear her awful jeggings to official engagements then Meghan should be able to wear smart trousers. Sophie, as others have said, wears trousers sometimes and so do the European Royal ladies. No monarchy has been overthrown because of a pair of trousers yet.
    The tuxedo idea is not a good one as it will invariably draw comparisons to Diana.

  21. Abby says:

    Gawd this feels like made up crap.

  22. aaa says:

    I can believe the story because this particular event was described as “glitzy evening event” and “an important Commonwealth occasion,” so while the Queen will not be present, the Sussexes have to give more consideration to the Queen’s preferences than would be given if it were an Invictus or Heads Together event.

    P.S.
    While I say I believe the story, I can believe that the DM is doing a hodgepodge, like the comment, “this newspaper has been told that Meghan has been expressing frustration with some of the monarchy’s archaic traditions.” I don’t think this means that Meghan is all that put out by having her choice to wear “a masculine Stella McCartney tuxedo suit” vetoed, I suspect that her reaction will be more along the lines of calling up the folks at Givenchy and placing an order for a suitable bespoked gown.

  23. Adee says:

    This is such a non-issue.
    If she feels more comfortable and confident to perform her duties at her peak, let the woman wear her elegant pants suits. To be honest, they look the best on her and she radiates in them.

  24. Laughysaphy says:

    Her hair is GLORIOUS in these pictures!

  25. Peg says:

    Meghan is busy decorating apartment at KP, settling in the Cotswolds for weekends, too much going on.

  26. gingersnaps says:

    It’s from the fail, I’ll take it with a grain of salt. Horrible paper and ‘journalism’

  27. Who ARE These People? says:

    So if this were true, which it isn’t, then all the royal women need to prance around in jodhpurs 24/7. Wouldn’t that be a sight.

  28. Maria says:

    And one thing she hasn’t done since she became engaged is dress like a Hollywood star. What a silly article.

    • DizzyLizzy says:

      This story is about the trousers at Wimbledon. They just don’t have the balls to say it out loud bc it would be perceived as bullying.

      • Missy says:

        What’s funny is that her look at Wimbledon was a hit with the fashion industry as well as on social media. She outshined a lot of major stars that day. Maybe that’s the problem?

      • DizzyLizzy says:

        @Maria that is exactly the problem. They can’t understand Meghan’s sense of individuality and style so want to bully her into dressing like Kate to then they can repost she’s turned into a unhappy stepford wife.

      • CeeCee says:

        Meghan looked ridiculous at Wimbledon. I don’t care how fashionable it is, she is a member of the royal family and your white pants shouldn’t be dragging on the ground. They will look dated and ridiculous in pictures 5 years down the road.

        These pants would be like Hillary wearing an outfit like that. She would be mocked, and rightly so. Meghan’s not supposed to be a fashion icon. She is supposed to look appropriate as a member of the British royal family. Hem your pants, Meghan!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Letizia, Maxima, Charlene, Mary, Victoria. They all wear trousers this same length. But you only have a problem with it when Meghan wears her trousers like that. Check.

  29. Lizabeth says:

    Sounds mostly made up. I’d rather see trousers than Kate’s painted-on jeggings. But I’m also not sure Harry isn’t picking his battles. It’s not clear to me (if the story was even true) if it’s saying he’s against all trousers or trouser suits or if he thought a tuxedo suit for an evening event while on their first big tour was inadvisable. If the latter I kind of agree with him.

  30. Mego says:

    Shortly after this story appeared I read that a source from KP denied this ever happened but I can’t find it anymore. It sounds totally made up to me.

  31. Mich says:

    I’m betting that it is actually the Fail that wants her to not wear trousers so they can rip apart how much her clothing costs.

    Also, Letizia is the boss in trousers so I say go for it Megs.

  32. harla says:

    I love Meg in trousers and I think they are completely appropriate for an evening event. That being said the little princess inside me really prefers to see the royal ladies in lavish gowns and glittering jewels for evening events, so much more for me to ohhh and ahhhh over :)

  33. Leyton says:

    Meghan worked on Suits. She literally wore pencil skirts and dresses 95% of the time. If you think she’s remotely close to bothered by any dress code, I think we are under estimating her.

    Also, it’s clearly NOT some strict dresscode for every day engagements. The only time is when they’re with the Queen and that is just out of respect and really not unreasonable of anyone to ask.

    This is silly and I think we’re putting too much stock into protocol police who want to make Meghan look out of place. Majority of what they say is WRONG.

    • magnoliarose says:

      She also balked when they wanted too many semi nude scenes. So she isn’t a woman who is afraid of the power of her own voice. So it stands to reason she would wear trousers if she wanted to.

      • Reese says:

        She’s an actress and she used her looks and her body to get the roles she wanted. Deal or no Deal come on! I lover her to death but let’s not make her something she’s not. She’s like every other actress out there.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I am not. I just don’t think she would simply say “Yes dear” to Harry if he didn’t like her wearing trousers. Which is why the made up story doesn’t even make sense.
        Actresses and models do have lines they don’t cross so they aren’t totally helpless but that wasn’t really my point and is a separate issue. I used that as an example of someone who isn’t a meek mouse.

        I am not making her into anything. I am addressing this story only.

      • KD says:

        Yeah, Meghan is not Kate. I don’t think she’ll like being told what to do or in this case wear.

      • Masamf says:

        No Reese, please stop. Meghan used her looks and her body to get roles she wanted? Are you kidding me right now? Comments and beliefs like yrs are the reason a lot of women get victimized and then blamed for men’s criminal behaviors. Why, so actresses can’t be smart people that have brains and be good at their craft but can only get work dependent on them selling Thierry bodies in exchange for roles? That’s absolute madness. The notions that put certain women the “dumb” box is mind boggling. Meghan, and many other actresses, get roles because they audition for them and are good at their craft. Not because of their looks and bodies. 🙄🙄🙄

      • CeeCee says:

        Really? Cause I have seen clips of lots and lots of semi-nude scenes she did, and sex scenes, too. A blow job scene early in her career.
        Stop whitewashing her history. Please.

      • IlsaLund says:

        @ CeeCee….Vonnie is that you?

      • Masamf says:

        @Ceecee, there are some people that, for some reason, can’t make the distinction between reel life and real life. I’m not sure if you are one of those but yr post above seems to suggest you are confusing the two. Just to explain a bit, reel life is when an actor is acting out a role, for example: Denzel Washington taking roles as a gangsta etc. That doesn’t mean Denzel is a gangsta in real life. Reel is a job from which an actor makes a living. Real is an actor’s life. Now, Meghan taking roles where she acted as a hooker and did blow jobs doesn’t make her a hooker. Just like Denzel, acting is a job from which Meghan earns a living. In real life though, Meghan is the first Duchess of Sussex and is married to prince Harry the Duke of Sussex, I’ll let that sink in for a bit.
        I’m not whitewashing Meghan’s history, I really don’t need to, there’s nothing to whitewash. My argument was not that Meghan has never taken and sex roles, if that’s what you got from it, you probably need to read it again. I strongly opposed the notion that women only use their bodies and good looks to get roles. My belief, and I gladly stick to it whether you agree or not, is that BOTH men and women are offered roles depending on merit. No one needs to pimp themselves to get any roles, and Meghan and or other actresses did not use their bodies or good looks to get where they got in the showbiz industry. Arguing otherwise is excusing and rationalizing sexual abuse and blaming victims that they bring it upon themselves. Right now Harvey Weinstein defense is that he exchanged roles for sex with consenting actressess. It makes me physically ill just to think that there are some posters on here that are supporting Harvey and his defense just because they hate Meghan or just hate women actors in general.

      • lsb says:

        masamf, Missed the whole Hollywood casting couch story that was unfolding all this year, then, did you? Actresses (and some actors too) have narrated getting absolutely pulverised during their “auditions”.

        By Meghan’s own account (less graphic, perhaps) she’s stated that she’s taken on roles and performed scenes as a younger actress that she’s not thrilled about. Further, that with time, her increased recognition allowed her to put her foot down on just how much she would have to reveal later in her time.

        She’s hardly the trollop she’s being made out to be by CeeCee but this manufactured outrage, especially in this age of uncomfortable disclosure of what Hollywood’s history has been is just painful. Reese is spot on.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Ah the classic tumblr rant about that one scene on a tv show years ago. We see you.

  34. Tallia says:

    She looks classy, Bonus – Not having to have weights sewn in your skirts and dresses and not having to worry about anything showing accidentally.

  35. Div says:

    I’m surprised so many people are defending a dress code that requires no trousers. I am absolutely fine with people being required to wear stockings under dresses or skirts, as that is an
    issue of covering skin. However, trousers are a different issue as they provide plenty of coverage. Is it even legal nowadays in the United States to tell a woman they are not allowed to wear slacks to work? I know some company got in big trouble for requiring women to wear make up a few years ago. Also, I worked at an extremely fancy, stuffy restaurant in grad school that got a lot of famous people and politicians for customers, that sort of thing. Even we were allowed to wear slacks at work. Also, I’ve definitely seen members of different royal families wearing slacks.

    That said, who knows if this is even true. It is the Daily Fail. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the royal family have to ask for additional money to do all those extremely expensive repairs to Buckingham Palace? I suspect once the queen is gone, there will be a serious debate about the monarchy because of the money and the archaic traditions

  36. Meggles says:

    Please, Kate wears trousers constantly so it’s clearly not protocol.

    Anyone who believes Harry cares what Meghan wears, I have a bridge to sell you.

  37. Avery says:

    I don’t believe Harry was harping on this. I think he loves her in pants and he is just so happy to be with her that he is not complaining. Any woman that voluntarily chooses to put up with all of the rules and scrutiny should be able to wear whatever she wants.

    • Carol says:

      I don’t believe this Daily Mail story either. Maybe the Queen likes a certain look but I doubt Harry or others really care what Meghan wears.

    • KD says:

      “Any woman that voluntarily chooses to put up with all of the rules and scrutiny should be able to wear whatever she wants.”

      hmmm, that isn’t true tho. If it was, people wouldn’t balk at Kate for wearing short skirts lol. They aren’t even that short in the first place. I remember when she was pregnant there were comments saying she should put her legs away ffs! Talk about backwards..

  38. D says:

    The part of this story I believe is Harry saying no to the Stella pant suit. Not for protocol but because he didn’t like it. There have been articles of him giving opinions on her clothes didn’t one of them confirm that? Maybe he just didn’t like this one outfit. I find that believable given the designer.

  39. Littlefishmom says:

    I don’t believe a single word of this. They love her. Period.

  40. Jh says:

    This is her best look. She looks gorgeous.

  41. perplexed says:

    I don’t think I believe this story.

    I also think I’ve seen her wear trousers more as a royal than as an actress. When she was an actress, she was in dresses a lot (the Hollywood style dresses, but dresses nonetheless) . It’s actually as a royal that I’ve seen her in trousers more often (which hasn’t been a lot, but more often than she was an actress). When she was an actress, the only times I can recall seeing her in pants were for that fashion line she advertised. So I get the impression they’re okay with the trousers.

    Honestly, I think they let her wear what she wants as long as it’s not too short (like what she wore on Craig Ferguson, which was worn for career purposes, I assume.)

  42. Bettyrose says:

    Please. Meghan has the upper hand here. Until the RF takes custody of her children, she can walk away, and ultimately the press will be worse for the RF than her. L.A. is her home and scandals are the norm there. She’ll always have enough money to never need a traditional job, and Harry could still be her side piece. None of that is happening tho, because no one is dictacting when she can wear trousers.

  43. Nancy says:

    Who ever uses the word trousers? Lol

  44. violet says:

    I think the interesting part of the article (which, like every other DM article, I take with a grain of salt) is that it talks about Harry objecting. As far as the trousers themselves go, I think like everything else, it should be assessed on a case by case basis. Sometimes, it will be more appropriate and fine, and others, not. I don’t get why it has to be so cut and dried an issue. That said, I don’t agree, and I think many others don’t, either, that Meghan has great legs. They are really sticks with no shape, and I think she tries to cover them a lot.

    But re the “tux” issue: I remember Diana in that tux, I think everyone does, it was one of her most famous outfits, although I don’t think it was one of Diana’s best looks, even on that 5’10″ Legs-For-Miles body. It always seems to me to be too “costumey” a look, if you know what I mean. And I wondered, if it were true, if Harry remembered how Diana looked in it, and perhaps that’s why he doesn’t want Meghan to copy Diana – perhaps it’s more painful for him than anything else.

    Meghan and Harry are now the privileged of the earth – not being able to wear trousers as a royal at royal working events as much as you’d like is a seriously First World problem. I think again, the DM is doing its best to undermine Meghan by making her look spoilt and petulant (just wait till they put up the price tags for her Australia tour wardrobe) and it’s best to keep that in mind.

  45. Maria says:

    I seem to remember the Queen in a gray pantsuit. And she looked lovely.

    • Dixiebells says:

      She has worn pants very very occasionally. I think there’s a pic of her leaving the hospital once but that might have been to hide a leg or hip issue (I don’t remember the exact circumstance) and I know I’ve seen her in pants on their old yacht. Not sure if that counts as on duty. I read an interview with one of her dressers that she likes dresses because their easier to get in and out of cars and constant sitting and standing. Where as a tucked in shirt into pants or a skirt has to be adjusted all day. I’m sure some of it is her tastes too and she obviously leans more old fashioned. But I don’t believe she wastes her time on younger members of the family who basically always look fine and polished. No one has worn anything scandalous to merit some queen intervention. Someone on this thread was insisting a while ago that she lets new family members make their own mistakes re: wardrobe and protocol and then corrects them once they’ve made a few blunders. And I have a hard time buying this. So she loans secretaries and advisors but tells them to still let new in laws screw up so she can ultimately step in? That’s a lot of long game manipulation going on. I think simplest solution is probably the right one. As long as you look polished and mostly conservative I don’t think the Queen stays up at night drafting memos on pants vs skirts or a hint of a shoulder.

      • Becks1 says:

        I also can see skirts and dresses being more comfortable for her as she has gotten older – probably easier to put on and then take off, easier to adjust if she gains a pound, loses a pound, etc. And she does come from a different generation so I can see that she may just prefer wearing dresses/skirts when working.

        I cant really see her enforcing that preference for the whole royal family for every event. I get that it may be understood for certain events – like Trooping the Colour – that the women all wear dresses or skirts – but like you said, I don’t think she stays up at night bc Meghan wore a (fantastic) pants suit to an event in Ireland.

  46. sa says:

    I’m not sure I believe this story, but I have to admit that now I desperately want to see her wear a tuxedo to glitzy evening event, whereas before I haven’t really cared that much about what she wears.

    (I have had opinions on outfits she’s worn, I mean that I haven’t had opinions about on what I want to see her wear, the way some people want her to keep wearing pants, or keep/get rid of the messy bun).

  47. Sparkly says:

    I hope we DO see this tuxedo suit. Better still if QE wears a trouser suit that day in solidarity.

  48. Clementine says:

    I cannot believe that in 2018 we are discussing a woman wearing pants.

  49. The Original G says:

    This is a completely fake story.

    The monarchy is a totally irrelevant anachronism and after the Queen passes it’ll melt into history. The wearing of modern clothing has nothing to do with it.

    There are a lot of angry frustrated people out there whose energies are being harvested amplified by the sickening racism and political dictatorship that’s rising.

    Let’s resist being drawn into these pointless conflict being promoted by these energy vampires.

    • magnoliarose says:

      It is a totally fake story.
      Charles will get his turn but then it will die. Maybe on his “watch”.
      Ironically the Brexiteers are conservative probably royalists and their assinine vote will be the death nail for all their beloved royals. They helped Putin change the landscape of their culture on the international stage. The BRF is world famous but the PMs and ambassadors aren’t.

    • violet says:

      @The Original G and magnoliarose – I’ll agree that at this point in time the monarchy looks from a distance like it’s poised on a cliff edge – but every time I see polls on it, it never goes down in popularity and that three-quarters of the British public want them to stay. I don’t understand it, but I’m not British.

      But either way, that doesn’t mean the story is fake. The story might be fake because the DM makes things up to get traffic and clicks, but not because the monarchy is on the way out.

      The bread and circuses stuff is a pretty established way of looking at it – but even in good economic times of relative stability, people seem to like having the bread and circuses.

      I make no claim to understanding why – the older I get, the less I know, especially about people.

      Which is why I plead guilty to preferring to talk about their clothes . . .

      • magnoliarose says:

        I imagine it is like no one cares about something until they do? They are so popular because of TQ. She’s been there for a half a century and familiar. When she is gone a lot of goodwill and largesse will go with her. If Diana had lived and she and Charles had not been so publicly unhappy it might have been different.

      • violet says:

        @magnoliarose – I’ll take your word on that, as I have no firsthand feeling about it. I do see why TQ is so respected, though. Funny, it does seem to be more about respect than anything else, which I guess says something good about the judgment of the British people.

      • magnoliarose says:

        :) I am just an observer like you violet. The Queen stopped returning my texts last year. lol We are just giving our opinions.
        I have family in the UK and I used to live there so I have so many loved ones and happy memories there. The UK has been good to my family and I am sick about what will happen after Brexit. At one point I thought my husband and I would move there to be closer to people we care about but not now.

  50. Lyla says:

    The queen says no pants? Oh, that’s why Kate doesn’t wear underwear. Lol.

    Love that McQueen outfit on Megan. I want it.

  51. Hunter says:

    I don’t imagine any of this to be true. It’s all so asinine.

  52. annalise says:

    I LOVE the deep side part in her hair in the pics. it is so much more flattering than that awful, Goop-esque middle part she usually wears. She really needs to rock the side part more often.

  53. ladida says:

    All the stories about Kate having to lower her hem line ended up being true. When the courtiers get on a mission they start these types of leaks. Where there’s smoke…

  54. Joannie says:

    Why do people argue about this woman all of the time? She’s an actual person not an object. I’m betting she’s asking herself what she’s got herself into. Harry as well.

    • violet says:

      @Joannie – they’re all actual people if it comes to it, but they have put themselves in the way of being talked about because that’s a symbol of their importance, and without their importance . . . bye bye! Meghan isn’t reading all these arguments – she’s got a new marriage to work on, she’s just married into one of the richest families on the planet, she’s probably planning a family ASAP – I think she knows quite well why she went for it. And I think Harry knew all along what the inevitable talk talk talk would be, but he wanted to get married and he wanted to marry her. I think everyone understood everything.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Agreed. Talking about them is an industry of its own. All of them sign up for it. They could retire and go live quietly in the country but they don’t.

      • KD says:

        If they retired to the country, would they still receive free, courtesy of the taxpayer perks? I imagine they wouldn’t, so I don’t see that happening anytime soon. They can moan about wanting to be “normal” but I don’t believe any of them would be willing to get off the free money/perks train.

    • Mego says:

      I agree that she is not having doubts about her choice. I think Harry made sure that she knew what she was signing up for marrying him. Also Meghan got a big taste of what was to come pre wedding so I sense she is coping well.

  55. BegoneOrangeCheeto says:

    Meg, ignore the Grey Men. You keep doing you. I LOVE the trouser suits. She looks professional and well put together – and very much like Letizia of Spain. Keep it up and ignore the haters.

    Honestly, there’s tradition and then there’s….. just ridiculous stuff that needs to be tossed. It’s 2018 NOT 1950!

  56. Stacey says:

    The DAY anyone would have the right to tell me what to wear! This is one of those scenarios where I would listen politely — to the advisors, to my husband, to whomever— then wear exactly what I wanted, always being respectful of the event and my hosts. But damn.

  57. Addison says:

    If this is an issue for Megan it’s not like she didn’t know this was the expectation. It’s ridiculous that she is even trying to do her own thing as she basically lost that privilege when she married into this family. Anyone who has a problem with things such as this should have thought about it before they married. If you say I do in this family you say I do to their way of life.

    Plain and simple don’t want to change. Don’t join this family.

  58. Mew says:

    Going against tradition? It’s not like the royals are just going to be like “oh how wonderful!” What on earth did people think would happen…

  59. Peg says:

    The Queen Is 92, honestly do you think she checking hemlines, stocking and nail polish? Who is wearing trousers, no she busy counting her money.

  60. Megan2 says:

    Um, hey CeeCee… did Meghan do something to you personally to make you this obsessively salty about her? You’ve criticized her wardrobe, her humanitarian work, her feminism, her acting, and implied that there is something damning or shameful about her career prior to marrying Harry, all in one post about whether or not she should be wearing pants to official events which doesn’t appear to have much basis in fact anyways.

    Are you a friend of Samantha? Were you acquainted with Veronica T? Or do you have some deep dark insider knowledge that would justify this level of vitriol? If you do, I would be truly interested.