Duchess Meghan & Prince Harry made a quiet trip to Amsterdam for a club opening?

Harry Meghan Loughborough

Let’s continue talking about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s appearance at Loughborough University for the Coach CORE Awards. I’m absolutely shocked that the mind-numbing tabloids didn’t try to make it sound like Meghan “broke protocol” by wearing trousers again. Instead, People Magazine tried to make it sound like Meg was a fashion rebel for… wearing navy and black together…? You guys, is that really a thing? I grew up in a “don’t wear brown and black together” household, but in my opinion, navy and black naturally go together. Think blue jeans and a black blouse or sweater – that combo looks perfect. So stop with this!

That being said, I’m here for any wild speculation about Meghan’s peplum and what it all means. For the record, I think she probably just liked the Oscar de la Renta top and didn’t care that people would speculate about whether she’s already knocked up. Who knows?

Also, this is a weird story: apparently, Meghan and Harry were in Amsterdam this weekend?!?

There’s nothing like a weekend trip with friends — just ask Prince Harry and Meghan Markle!

While Prince William‘s family (minus 5-month-old Prince Louis) spent Saturday at the wedding of one of Kate Middleton‘s closest friends, Sophie Carter, Meghan and Harry (who is also a longtime friend of Carter’s) jetted to Amsterdam to celebrate the launch of celebrity hangout Soho House’s newest location, according to the Evening Standard. The invite list for the getaway weekend, which reportedly included pampering treatments at the spa and a lobster spaghetti dinner, was full of other A-list guests like Eddie Redmayne, Stanley Tucci and Jenna Coleman.

In addition to doubling as a 55th birthday celebration for Soho House founder Nick Jones, the kickoff party included a tour of Amsterdam’s red-light district (which the Evening Standard notes was not attended by Meghan and Harry) as well as a boat ride through the Dutch city’s famous canals.

[From People]

Is it really possible that Meghan and Harry went all the way to Amsterdam and attended the launch of a private club and zero people took photos or even tweeted about it? That’s so weird. I think Meghan has some connection to the Soho House in Toronto, but does she have connections to international Soho Houses? Or does Harry? And isn’t the point of having celebrities coming to your party the idea of getting those celebrities photographed at your party?

Last thing: stop tweeting me about Samantha Markle, damn it. I saw the headlines: Toxic Samantha is flying to the UK to force a discussion with Meghan about Thomas Markle’s health. I DO NOT CARE. THE WHITE MARKLES SUCK. Samantha is probably going to be photographed as she’s being dragged kicking and screaming from the palace gate.

Harry Meghan Loughborough

Harry Meghan Loughborough

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

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

92 Responses to “Duchess Meghan & Prince Harry made a quiet trip to Amsterdam for a club opening?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Digital Unicorn says:

    I think it depends on whether we see shots of the other celebs who attended the event – Soho House are known for being v discreet so if there was a party and the Sussex’s went it would have been locked down.

    Also, I think both Princes and their set have connections to Soho House. Don’t know how the membership work but I think you can have an international membership that gets you access to ALL houses in all locations.

    • Pravana says:

      That’s correct. I’m a member and you can have either Local House access (which lets you into a single house) or Every House membership, which gets you in anywhere worldwide. People there– especially at a VIP party– wouldn’t be taking photos. Honestly people who are the type to take pics of celebs don’t make it onto the membership rolls. I’ve seen people’s guests try to snap pics just of their own food and get told by staff to knock it off, and at least one of the London clubs now has additional signs up warning members not to post on social media (whether pictures or just tweets) about anything involving the club.

    • ichsi says:

      What @Pravana said. They’re notoriously private, there’s a reason why Soho House is so popular with a certain group of celebrities.

      • Jan90067 says:

        I read somewhere that a couple tried to take a selfie inside, and get the Beckhams in the background of the shot. They had their membership terminated immediately. They ARE strict about pics!

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        This is becoming a bit negative that an HRH is so close to a private establishment – the Duchess affiliation seem almost promoting this club a tad too much.

      • Killjoy says:

        RoyalSparkle- I tend to agree in light of the fact that the club is engaging in an ambitious expansion right now, even though it’s not running a profit, and has an untested model. That being said, it seems like it’s a natural fit for a social club for them, and it sounds like they have a lot of “friends”/connections there.

    • Addie says:

      Also, Meghan is best friends with Marcus Anderson who is the global membership director. She is/was also a brand ambassador for SoHo House, so has had access to everything. After the wedding it was claimed in a couple of papers that it was Marcus who introduced the couple, not Misha or Violet. That makes sense because so much of their relationship has been conducted through SoHo. Even their country house is next to/ on SoHo land. Both Harry and William police all images used of them and theirs in the press. There are no accidental candids. If we see pics, they’ve approved them. Not sure, though, that they should be so publicly associated with SoHo. It looks flat out like endorsement. Apart from that, going to a three-day party smacks of indolence and living high on the hog since they’ve just come off a summer break.

    • Uppenyrcraut says:

      Harry and Meghan met at London So Ho House, so there’s your connection.

  2. Alyse says:

    Yeah, I wouldn’t wear navy and black. Blue jeans aren’t the same as navy. Brown and black go well together though, not heard of that one!

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      I woul never wear navy with black—thery’re too close and it just looks off. I often DO wear brown and black though, as long as it’s a warm brown, a tan, or a tweedy fabric. I wouldn’t wear a DARK brown with black because, like navy, it’s too close, so it looks off. I thought Meghan’s navy and black outfit looked off, though she herself looked very pretty.

      Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy (my forever fashion icon, and I can’t help invoking her whenever possible!) wore browns and blacks together.

      • Marianne says:

        Totally agree. NO to blue and black. Except for jeans, which read like a neutral (as Stacey London would remind us).

        But a camel with black. Yes, that’s good. However, like others have said, black with dark brown, also no. Looks bad.

        While acknowledging that on her worst days, Meghan looks better than I do on my best, I really don’t care for her outfit at this event. It feels off. Also, the top and the trousers don’t co-ordinate either in colour or mood.

        Also, really not a fan of those spiky heels showing just a sliver under the trouser hem. A heavier shoe would have been better.

        That’s all!

    • Jan90067 says:

      I LOVE black and navy: a great black cashmere sweater and blue jeans or navy slacks…classic! And I also love brown and black. My fav: when I was a teen, I had a brown (more camel-y) colored suede zip down the front mini length jumper that I wore with a black turtleneck and black boots… ahhhh good times 😊

      • Amy Tennant says:

        Right, light or warm brown with black is nice. My favorite was similar to yours, Jan. A camel suede zip front vest and skirt that I wore with a black turtleneck! And I like khaki and black. I’m not fond of navy and black usually, but that’s probably because I couldn’t pull it off without looking like it was a mistake. I don’t love Meghan’s combo, but at least she looks like she meant to do it. And blue jeans don’t count to me; they just go with anything imo.

      • Boudica says:

        I’m with Amy Tennant on the blue jeans thing. Special rules apply to blue denim jeans: they go with anything. I love black shirts and jumpers with blue jeans, but otherwise would never, ever, wear blue and black together.

      • LahdidahBaby says:

        Yeah, blue jeans don’t count—they’re essentially neutral and can go with anything, as Marianne said. Meghan’s black with dark navy just looked off. But her lovely face and manner—beautiful with any color combo.

        Carolyn Bessette would wear brown leather boots with a black ensemble and omg it looked superb.

      • RoyalSparkle says:

        +1
        A quick go to ….

  3. Annie. says:

    Black and blue jeans, yes. Navy and black, I don’t like it. I also don’t like black and brown…

  4. Toot says:

    Yeah, one of Meghan’s best friends “Markus Anderson”, is in charge of the membership of all Soho Houses, so she has a deep connection.

  5. jeanne says:

    I’ve just realized how beautiful and chic brown and black look together. and i’m 35! i thought it was a no no when i was younger but i was so wrong. just look at old picks of carolyn bissett kennedy and you’ll get it. but dark blue and black, not so much.

    i don’t think she’s pregnant. she has a boxy torso so it’s hard to tell. HOWEVER, someone on here brought up the keratin hair theory so i could be a believer…

    • Erinn says:

      I think it really comes down to shade. If you’re wearing a super dark navy or brown that come off as being ‘almost’ black then it looks strange because it’s almost as if you thought you were putting together an all black outfit in bad lighting and didn’t realize you had grabbed other colors.

      I’m of the opinion that if there’s enough difference in the shades you can get away with more. I only really like brown and black together when it’s a medium brown at the darkest. And it’s all shade dependent – and what works with your individual coloring.

    • Eliza says:

      Camel and black totally.
      Milk chocolate and black is ok.
      Espresso and black nope. Looks like two different shades of black pulled together.

      Same with blues:
      Medium blue and black totally.
      Naval/Dark blue and black is ok.
      Deep indigo and black looks like two clashing shades of black.

      • violet says:

        @jeanne – I’ve always loved brown and black if they tone instead of washing each other out, which is what black and navy do. They’re just too close together for me. I would so loved to have seen that top over black trousers in so many other possible colors: caramel, cream, ivory, rose (NOT candy pink, please! a true rose!), sky blue, jewel red . . . anything but navy!

  6. abba says:

    Soho House has a pretty strict privacy policy. Both Harry and Meghan have been members of Soho House for several years. Meghan also attended their opening in Istanbul a few years back. Harry was a regular at Soho Farmhouse and also the ones in London before Meghan. It’s a discreet private place. People know the rules. This weekend stay was actually for Nick Jones’ birthday, he was also at their wedding.

  7. Eleonor says:

    In the moment the pr machine for the book started I knew there would have been consequences from the Markle. Lock Samantha and throw away the key.

    • Enough Already says:

      A negative story about opening a Soho House? I don’t suspect Thomas or Samantha Markle. Now if you’d said Waffle House…

  8. Beth says:

    I never wear black and navy together. Blue jeans can be worn with any color shirt, and are completely different than navy blue pants. Not all shades of brown look good with black, but it’s better than navy and black

  9. Jessica says:

    Her blow out looks killer. Whether it’s that or the outfit or her general demeanor, I think this is the best she’s looked: stylish, comfortable and confident.

    • Katy says:

      I actually think this is the worst blow out I’ve seen on her. It looks stiff and wig like.

      But she’s a gorgeous woman, no doubt.

      • lobbit says:

        OK. Tightly curled, afro-textured hair like Meghan’s doesn’t blow dry as straight and flat (and limp) as hair with a looser curl. She’s obviously stopped chemically straightening her hair – she’s got that telltale puffiness at the roots that only comes from straightening new growth with gentle heat – no keratin or relaxers. I think it looks great and gives her hair body.

      • Jan90067 says:

        On another (conspiracist) theory: She could be stopping with the *real* Brazilian blowout NOW (and just doing Keratin, which, in my opinion, having had both, doesn’t do such a great job), so that after a few months back from the tour, when they get the “all clear” from the Zika threat, the formaldehyde formula will be out of her system (by hair growth) and she’s “clear” to get pregnant.

        I’ll just wait over here… whistling to myself…😗🎶
        😀

      • Hally says:

        I’m seconding Jan’s comment, she must have been having the real brazilian blowout or something similar done which works because of the formalin/formaldehyde in the mix. She is probably transitioning to keratin treatments which are not the same at all in terms of effectiveness, but are considered “safer”. With only the keratin treatment she will have to actively straighten and style it to keep it smooth, when i had a brazilian blowout i didn’t even need to style it, it was wash and go (I only have lightly wavy/ frizzy hair, not curly, but i’m imagining if the treatment is done right even curly hair acts that way).
        I guess in this instance it was poorly styled and honestly it seems like she might have added extensions? maybe she always had them but its the first time ive noticed. the way her hair is in the front is how melania styles her hair.

    • lobbit says:

      She looks so happy and confident and high energy!

    • RoyalSparkle says:

      +100
      ‘Together’ as a Best Seller and Release seem to boost The Duchess confidence status – as a new Royal even more.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I like navy and black together, even though I know some people think its a no-no. I don’t like black and brown together, but if you do, then wear what makes you happy. fashion “rules” annoy me.

    I think Meghan looks nice, what I don’t like is the proportion of the top to the flared pants. I think skinny pants would have maybe looked better with the top. I don’t think she is dressing to hide a bump lol.

    As for the Amsterdam trip – I can believe it. Meghan and Harry have proven that they can really fly under the radar when they want.

    • Princessk says:

      Yes, it’s that flying under the radar that l love about them. Both Harry and Meghan go all over the place without being noticed.

  11. RunnerMomLawyer says:

    1000% in agreement with not giving the White Markles any space. Maybe they will fade away once the tabloids realize that no one believes the crap they are selling.

  12. lu says:

    That would have to be the ugliest outfit I’ve seen her in yet. It looks like it’s made from an old wetsuit. And high heels on a court? She’s so disrespectful.

    • Heather says:

      Please. May I direct your attention to this picture: https://da4pli3l5vc0d.cloudfront.net/59/6d/596defc388792aa36e8cdcadaf8e7593eef655c1/h=300/?app=portal&sig=51bb5d0af651d7aec4a10085af72a45b1861319cd3f8649845ba7095250d4d73

      It’s of Jenny Boucek who was a coach for the WNBA and was then hired as an assistant player development coach. I love her shoes. I could never wear them (weak ankles) but I covet them. Tell me again what she is standing on?

      • TheOriginalMia says:

        Yep! Female coaches have been wearing heels on hardwood for ages. And quelle surprise, the floors haven’t been damaged.

        Don’t know if Meghan is pregnant. I know she and Harry are happy newlyweds. The blouse was a bit much. It made me sweat. But she was dressed to attend the awards ceremony and present an award, so in that sense, she was dressed fine. Her hair wasn’t slicked down, but more natural. Looked to me like the humidity got to it.

      • Deedee says:

        Thank you! I pointed this out on another thread and was raked across the high heel coals. Just because your gym teacher told you not to wear heels on the gym floor doesn’t mean that Meghan was committing some major faux pas.

      • Erinn says:

        I still don’t think it’s smart. It does damage the court- but it’s the damage to their feet and ankles that’s more concerning honestly. And plenty of these college coaches have broken a heel during a game – which clearly isn’t appropriate footwear if it’s breaking.

        You have people like Muffet McGraw who say dumb things like ““They are part of my uniform. I am a role model for these young women, so it is important for me to dress well, and wearing high heels is an important part of that,” ”

        And then Suzie McConnell-Serio: “I choose my footwear based on my outfit,” she says. “Sometimes, after games, my feet are killing me. But I don’t think about that during a game. Everything you do is based on success — from how you perform on the court to how you look while you are performing on the court.”

        Mindy White: ”I believe women in any profession, whether you are coaching or working in an office, get confidence from wearing high heels. It is also good for our players to see women who dress professionally. It gives them someone to look up to and to know that we take what we are doing seriously, that we look the part.”

        I just don’t get that. They’re putting themselves in pain (and have less traction in heels on the court than they would in other shoes) just because they feel that they need to be wearing heels to be considered dressed up. They’ve been taught that they need to appear attractive for other people and suffer through uncomfortable shoes and just being great at their job isn’t enough – and I don’t think it’s a good thing to be promoting that to be taken seriously you need to be wearing 5″ pumps.

        That said – Meghan’s shoes are whatever. I think a wider heel would have been just as pretty while being a little more suited for the occasion, but I think a pair of pretty flats of some form would have been my choice. Clearly she was competent enough in the shoes though – she’s not struggling. But it’s her choice and she made it through the day fine. I think if she was going to be on a court regularly for any real length of time you’d see her in slightly different shoes.

      • Heather says:

        Erinn, I don’t think it’s particularly smart either, but I’m such a klutz I’d be terrified of falling and breaking something in front of everyone. And falling in the most ungraceful manner to be caught by the media on top of that, possibly taking the mascot out with me. But it’s not disrespectful, which is was lu’s comment.

      • Killjoy says:

        DeeDee – it’s not being “raked across the coals” if you’re the one frantically responding repeatedly to everyone who commented that they didn’t think heels could be worn on a basketball court.

        ETA: Erin, I agree with you! In response to DeeDee’s voluminous comments yesterday regarding NCAA coaches wearing heels on the court, I did a little research, and while I can see now that it is a normal practice, it was still depressing to me. Many of the women have given interviews along the lines of “how can I show my players what it means to be a professional woman unless I’m wearing heels!” It’s so impractical in the context of sporting events. I don’t care if men typically suit up — their suiting does not include spike heels, and if it did, they sure AF wouldn’t be wearing them to run around a court.

        I’m a lawyer – I frequently wear heels. But if I know I’ll have a crazy day running around, even I ditch the heels. It’s more important to function freely and safely than some idea of what a professional woman HAS to look like. A professional woman is one who gets her job done. That’s it.

        However, when I was poking around the internet about this yesterday, I *did* find actual newspaper articles written with photos, about women damaging courts by doing so. The wood must have been really soft or something. So who knows what you can/should do on a court you’re unfamiliar with.

        As far as Meghan wearing them on the court, it’s really not a big deal, it’s not like she’s a coach, and I’m sure no one cared. She looked fine and appropriate enough, per usual!

    • Bea says:

      Nothing about Meghan wearing high heels on a court is disrespectful. She’s not the first or the last.

      https://bit.ly/2IdhBjB

    • Peg says:

      Yes Mam, No Mam.

    • Gigi La Moore says:

      I don’t like the outfit either. She can’t dress IMHO. It’s hit then miss, miss, muss, miss, sort of hit and then miss again. I have liked maybe 4 outfits. Love her though.

  13. Katy says:

    I just can’t imagine senior royals going to a Soho House opening party in Amsterdam. It seems a bit “extra” in lack of better word. That’s something Meghan would do back when she was a TV star, but royals are different. They stay well clear of anything that could be interpreted as an endorsement. They’re meant to be more exclusive than normal celebrities. I know they visit these private clubs, but there’s a difference between a discrete visit on a Friday night in London and actually traveling abroad to attend its opening.

    • Peg says:

      That poor Harry, Meghan is leading him astray, Soho House, next it will be in a hotel room in Las Vegas where he will keep his clothes on.

    • Gigi La Moore says:

      I don’t see a problem with it. They are allowed to have a social life. As long as they are focused on their duties, no harm in having fun and a personal life.

      • kwala says:

        @Gigi. I don’t think there is any problem with royals having a social life, being normal people, having normal families and being happy. But it does take away the specialness and mystery of royalty. Why are we paying these people with our tax money just so they can gallivant around living celebrity lifestyles? (I am not interested in hearing, oh but they must have paid for this one trip with their own money, that is not the point). Also I am not in any way trying to say Meghan and Harry should do this or that, or behave in whatever way. I am just saying it is clear that they are nothing special, and why are we spending tax money on them again? (I am against all the royals existing as royals, not just picking on these two).

    • Heather says:

      I think people forget how small Europe really is. Did you know Amsterdam is only an hour away and it’s closer than Balmoral?

    • kwala says:

      yep. definitely emphasises the point that these days the royals are just celebrities (with no talent, of course).

      • Gigi La Moore says:

        I just can’t with these arguments. I like Meghan and Harry a great deal but they are not the second coming of Christ, they are just people. Let them live. As far as “paying” for them, that’s the set up. We are all paying for people. In the states, it is all these dirty politicians. I live in Kentucky, the home of the disgusting Mitch McConnell. Do you think I want to pay for this joker? However, I don’t care what he is doing in his personal life. I do care that he is destroying this country in his work. As long as M and H kick butt in their job, who cares?

      • kwala says:

        I care of course, as a taxpayer. Your dirty politicians are still democratically elected, so long as you accept the system you accept the politicians even those you didn’t vote for.
        I do agree that Meghan and Harry are just people and they should live their lives. Just not on the public’s dime. A lot of people feel the same way. The reason I bring this up in this particular post is that they do all these celebrity-ish things, which should serve to demystify this whole “royals are better than everyone” malarkey. And if they’re not better, why are we paying for them?

      • Gigi La Moore says:

        Kwala, it is what it is in GB as well. That’s the system under which the Royal Family operates. Besides, none of us knows how the visit was paid for and with whose funds. I don’t see an issue, you do. PaTayToe-PaTahToe.

      • kwala says:

        it’s not the same at all Gigi. I believe in democracy, I don’t believe in monarchy. I don’t like most of our current crop of British politicians, but I accept them because I accept that system. I didn’t mean to start a “abolish the monarchy” stream in this post (although I would very much be in favour of abolishing the monarchy, but that’s a discussion for another day). I just meant to point out that they’re demystifying this royal thing (perhaps even for those people who are fine with monarchies) by behaving as common (lol) celebrities.
        And about who paid for this trip, they may have paid for it themselves. It is not relevant to the point I am making.
        Edited to add: as an American, do you feel like a monarchy is a moral system in the 21st century? Would you accept it in your own country?

      • Gigi La Moore says:

        I meant it’s the same in that there is nothing you can do to get out of paying for the Royal Family. That is your country’s system, like it or not. I understand you didn’t elect them. However, although we do elect them here, we still get stuck with people we don’t want to pay for and with no term limit’s these people have to die in many cases for us to get out of it. It’s not perfect, here or in GB but that’s the deal.

    • Royal Suitor says:

      It was the 55th birthday party of their friend. A good enough friend to have attended their wedding. That friend happens to be the owner of Soho House which is where the party was held. Now they can’t attend private birthday parties, where no paparazzi shots were taken, but they can go to private weddings with pictures splashed all over the papers the next day? OK…(eye roll)

  14. Sparkly says:

    Shows how much I know about fashion. I thought everything went with black.

    So if Samantha really travels over there to talk sh– &/or try to confront Meg, can they finally arrest her for harassment?

  15. Anastasia says:

    I hope if Samantha actually turns up at the palace gates, everyone pulls a Mariah Carey: we don’t know her.

    Totally agreed: the white Markles are TRASH.

    • perplexed says:

      I don’t think it’s possible to enter those palaces where the residents are without some kind of invitation, so how she thinks she can force a discussion is strange to me. You can’t just knock on the door. Maybe she can hang out at the Kensington cafe area where the tourists are, but that’s about as close as she can get to the place.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        The tourist areas and public park/road around KP is the closest Scammy is every going to get to Meghan. The min she sets foot uninvited onto the Palace property, she’ll be cuffed and off to jail where she WILL be prosecuted. There are signs all over the place telling people that.

  16. Sonia says:

    The whole point of Soho House is that it’s incredibly private. They don’t allow phones or pictures except for certain events, like birthdays.

  17. lobbit says:

    I’m sure that Meghan and Harry and lots of other royals travel for leisure. They’re not “quiet” trips or “secret” trips – they’re just…trips lol.

  18. aquarius64 says:

    Sam won’t get Meghan, she will have security. London police may pick her up and arrest her because they have enough to press charges. No money, sign the. DNA or prison. George had an IRIS terrorist threaten him and the BRF didn’t flinch.

  19. Dot says:

    It’s bad optics.

    They had their first date at a Soho House in London. they had dates in SH Toronto, they live near SH Farmhouse and now they visited the opening of SH Amsterdam. They might as well be paid ambassadors for SH.

    However, the POW also has links to SH, he opened White City House a few days before HM’s wedding, so I’m guessing Nick Jones contributes to POW’s charities, in a you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.

    • violet says:

      @DOT – I just found out about Soho House and on that basis I kind of agree with you – it smacks of rich celeb culture and for the royals that’s never a great idea – when I googled it I saw snickers about it on some crappy blogs – you can see the regular readers of the DM curling their lips up. That’s probably why there are no photos, aside from Soho House emphasis on privacy.

    • Addie says:

      Meg was/is a brand ambassador for SoHo House. It’s a constant thread running through their relationship and just looks bad. It is endorsement, pure and simple. They should go where they want but why tell us? If it’s a private event, why do we even have to know they attended? We’re not informed that they went to this or that club or restaurant. The only reason is to give SoHo some free coverage in the press and bludgeon people with a royal endorsement to the place.

      • Natalie S says:

        Their wedding registry was through Soho House and also ended up in the papers. I agree that there are a lot of references to Soho House whether or not that’s a bad thing. Markus Anderson even accompanied Meghan to the Invictus Games.

        They’re not out of step though with Charles or the Cambridges who also enjoy partying with celebrities.

    • Natalie S says:

      It’s snobbery. People wouldn’t care if it were Lulu’s or whatever the name is of the club the Birley family started. If the Soho House organization were a few hundred years old, people would shrug it off as being part of tradition.

      The Cambridges just came back from partying in Mustique but “optics” issues aren’t even raised anymore because everyone has gotten used to it and people will get used to whatever routine Harry and Meghan set.

  20. violet says:

    I never heard of Soho House till this appeared but looked it up – apparently it has something of an unsavory rep in some ways and there was huge opposition to it opening in Amsterdam and even in Beverly Hills. I have a rule of thumb that if the DM is pointing this out, and doing it with a smile, they mean to throw shade at M&H. I notice they have a pattern set up: on any day that they cover Meghan’s regular royal work, they say lovely things about her and then also print something that undercuts that. They really are the pits.

  21. Janet says:

    Samantha is nothing. She *will* die bitter and alone and she deserves to. Not. Sorry.

  22. Gigi La Moore says:

    I wish the word “optics” would die. It’s like it is being used just to be used.

    • lobbit says:

      I find that people use the word to talk about things they personally dislike – so going to Soho House is “bad optics,” but really, the general population doesn’t know anything about it. It’s just another private, members only club – and the world’s elite – artists and society types alike – have always gravitated toward these sorts of spaces.

  23. Betsy says:

    Okay, from her face in these pictures I would definitely say she’s pregnant. What passes for a little water weight (I’m no you mocking; I genuinely envy the thin!), her expression seems like she’s trying not to barf and fall asleep…. mmmm hmmm.

  24. janerys says:

    It’s true. I visited my cousin in Amsterdam this weekend. Her friend works there and said Meghan was very friendly and went by Meghan and also remembered her name. Her friend isn’t excited by celebrity and the other name she mentioned from the party was Jeb from Arrested Development.

  25. notasugarhere says:

    Testing to see if I can post on this thread since none of my posts on another royal thread are coming through.

  26. Jayna says:

    I don’t get the love for the top. It is awful in that it is so bunched up between her breasts, almost like someone just took a safety-pin to it. And the side, long part of the top is too bulky. Nah. I’m not feeling it at all. I give it a thumbs down. And, yes, if Kate were out there in those heels, she would have been ripped apart on here. As for me, I couldn’t care less that Meghan is in heels out there, just like I wouldn’t care if Kate was..

    Having said how much I don’t iike that top, still, she pulls it all off because I love the pants on her with the heels. I love her hair. She looks very, very pretty. Her face is beautiful as always. So because of everything else, it enables me not to pay attention to that top/blouse, whatever it is.

  27. Samantha?? Why do you always bring up Kate in Meghan threads? Just don’t read about her. You sound insane.