Duchess Meghan wears Reiss for an International Women’s Day event

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex joins a panel discussion convened by The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust

Today is International Women’s Day. Doesn’t it feel like this year’s International Women’s Day is a bigger deal than in years past? I feel like I’ve read about like 20 major events being held today to mark the occasion. It feels like a confluence of movements, awareness campaigns and issue-based non-profits are all using March 8, 2019 as a moment to come together and talk about the state of women and girls. The Duchess of Sussex is one of those women marking the day with a big activity: Meghan is taking part in a panel discussion at King’s College to discuss the state of women today. The panel was convened by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, of which Meghan is the newly appointed vice president (Harry is president).

I know it’s strange to talk about fashion on International Women’s Day when the conversation could be on solidarity, women’s rights, economic rights, etc. But… fashion is important. It’s a billion-dollar industry and Meghan is part of that. It appears that Meghan is wearing a dress from Reiss – a mass market British line popular with the Duchess of Cambridge – which retails for £185. Meghan hasn’t worn a ton of mass-market British labels thus far, and I think this was largely a good choice. I wonder if she had it altered to accommodate her bump? I like that she’s not afraid of bold patterns, and my one minor complaint is that like Kate before her, I think Meghan should aim for a knee-length hemline. I don’t think Meghan had this Reiss dress altered to raise the hemline though (which Kate does all the time). Her blazer is £1,245 Alexander McQueen, and I’m pretty sure it’s a repeat. Her heels – I can’t believe she’s still wearing such high heels – are Manolos.

Also: Baldy is really shooting his shot, right??

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, WENN.

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

199 Responses to “Duchess Meghan wears Reiss for an International Women’s Day event”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. OriginalLala says:

    Happy International Women’s Day to my fellow Celebitches!!!

    • Megan says:

      International Women’s Day event at Kings College, hmmm…

      • Tina says:

        What’s wrong with King’s? It’s no more or less feminist than Queen”s University Belfast or any other UK university.

      • Clare says:

        Megan – are you for real with that comment? It’s called that because King George was a patron. It’s current chancellor is a woman.
        Please relax with the reach.

      • Megan says:

        @Clare It’s called a joke.

      • Clare says:

        Really? Because nothing about your comment, including the ‘hmmm…’ sounded like a joke.

      • Megan says:

        @Clare Humor is subjective. I think you need to take your own advice and relax.

      • LivePlantsCleanAir says:

        hmmmmm @Megan…..seems your humour did not come through, if there was meant to be any at all…..hmmmmmmmmm…..oh, just kidding………

  2. Kittycat says:

    I agree.

    The hemline is a little short.

    I was on the Reiss website and they do have other dresses with a longer hem.

    • MrsBump says:

      Reiss is my favourite British brand. I’m glad Meghan is wearing a high street label, but that dress is too short especially for an event where she’s sitting in front of an audience.

      • Clare says:

        Man, my issue with Reiss is that their stuff doesn’t wash well. I love their cuts, but the fabrics are often such crummy – despite not being at all inexpensive (for a regular person!)

      • MrsBump says:

        indeed .. i just end up washing everything by hand or dry cleaning.

      • SarSte says:

        +1000 love love love Reiss, it’s been my fav discovery since moving to the UK. I felt like in Canada, on the fashion $$/££ scale, we had cheap fast-fashion brands and very high-end designer brands, but very little in between. The UK has some awesome mid-range brands.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        SarSte is that what it is? Thanks for pinpointing…I’m from the States originally and living in Canada have been puzzled about how clothing is sold here — lots of mall chains that all look the same and the quality isn’t very good. And this is simultaneous with the decline in department stores. I miss having real choice.

      • Ronja says:

        Ooh this is a great conversation! I live in the UK and love the high street brands here. I’m going to the US on holiday (NY) and would love some tips om equivalent high street brands. Last time I went, I struggled to find reasonably priced clothes that were not EU ones (lots of Zaras and HMs) or either too far down (Forever 21) or high on my budget and age spectrum 😂

      • Nancy says:

        She looks beautiful. I’m so glad it’s her and not me being at the end of a pregnancy. At least I didn’t have the World dissecting my outfits and yada yada, I’m not a Duchess, but give this lady a break. She’s big time pregnant!!!

    • KNMC says:

      I don’t think it’s the length that’s the problem per se; it’s the way it rides up in back. It’s just not a good fit. The fabric also seems more spring/summery so it feels like she’s rushing the season here. This isn’t a horrible look, just not stellar. I love the hair and the earrings, though.

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

        It’s both.

      • Amy Too says:

        I think it’s a regular, non maternity dress that she just bought in a larger size so it doesn’t actually fit right on a pregnant woman. Not all regular clothes can be worn during pregnancy just by goin up a size or two. The jacket also looks really tight on her arms and too small in general. If it’s a repeat from when she was not pregnant or less pregnant, then it makes sense that it’s too small now. I really like Meghan and I generally like her style and I like that she takes more risks and dresses like a professional adult woman, but she often has fit issues, price issues, and also seems to have trouble matching her outfit to the season, time of day, or event. And I know lots of people are going to say she gets a pass for being new, being pregnant, and building her wardrobe, and I agree with those things to some extent but I just feel like she’s having fit/price/seasonal/event-appropriateness issues quite often as opposed to just every now and then. I think she will have a much easier time with her clothing as time goes on and she’s no longer pregnant, and she’s better able to intuit what should be worn for what events.

      • minx says:

        If she did indeed buy a non-maternity dress at this stage of her pregnancy that wasn’t a wise decision. It doesn’t fit correctly. The jacket looks like it’s from Dress Barn. I do like the print of the dress and the collar is flattering

    • FC says:

      I hate how short this is because 1. The hemline is all out of whack in the back, and 2. On a day she should be dunking on the trolls with this massive VP appointment she’s instead giving them the narrative that she’s “shamefully” showing too much leg. She should have gone for a Hillary Clinton bosswoman white suit.

      • V says:

        The anti-Meghan brigade would have found another reason to criticize what she wears. But was that a “massive apointment”? Her husband was given his position as president a year ago,so being the vice president of this same patronages is basically normal business considering that they like to work together.

    • minx says:

      It just doesn’t fit right. Isn’t there a tailor available FFS?

      • Lorelei says:

        Is this the McQueen jacket she wore as part of a pantsuit to present an award that one time? Because I thought it looked absolutely fabulous on her then, but now it just seems too tight.

  3. Toot says:

    I like that dress alot, Meghan looks good. Looking forward to what’s said at the panel.

  4. Annie. says:

    What a great event to celebrate our day.

    As for the fashion, I love this dress. I am not sure it is perfect for the event though, given that she is going to be sitting most of the time, and as we can see on the photos, when she crosses her legs the dress ends up a little too high. We can’t see anything, of course, but I would be terrified!

    But she looks lovely

  5. Lexistential says:

    I love the nod to a mainstream British label, but the dress looks too short and like it’ll inch up a bunch when she sits down, and consequently, it looks like an intern choice instead of a professional VP. Wish she had gone for trousers or a length like the other day’s palace reception.

  6. Kaylah says:

    She looks really good. I love when her hair is up because you can really see her face.
    The pictures I’ve seen where she’s sitting are showing major leg. A knee length dress would have been so much better.

  7. Erinn says:

    I’m super into this dress. It might be one of my favorites that she’s worn. I like the pattern – and I pretty much always like black and white together.

    She looks great here – hair and makeup are on point – absolutely no shade from me.

  8. Seraphina says:

    Happy women’s Day.

    Yes she looks great but hemline needs to be longer.

  9. DS9 says:

    Escalando! Legs on a woman…where they can be seen! And on Women’s Day!

  10. Svea says:

    Here’s something that seems odd to me. She’s not even a member of the RF a year, yet keeps getting appointed to all these public duties representing the “firm.” What surprises me is that the firm hasn’t taken a wait-and-see-how-she-does approach, easing her into the role of representing the monarchy. You’d see this in business. In her case, she’s received all these appointments quickly and jumped in, which is clearly her wish and kudos, but it may account for the PR problems. I thought the monarchy machine was savvier than that.

    • Tina says:

      The royals choose how much they’re involved with, there’s no central firm making those decisions. Meghan clearly likes to work.

    • Clare says:

      I think its a combination of the BRF wanting to make the most of her popularity and her WANTING to work. I don’t know if its smart or will backfire (she has certainly made some small missteps (Givenchy price tags, I am looking at you), but I think its good that they are rolling out the first black british royal and allowing her to do the work she wants to do.

    • KNMC says:

      I’d also imagine it has something to do with Harry advocating for her. He’s clearly doted on by his father and grandmother, and I suspect a lot of the time what Harry wants, Harry gets.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      The PR problems — i.e. tabloid attacks — are mostly because she’s a woman of colour and an American and an actress, yes? And her lousy father’s side has given them an angle. Not because of the work she’s doing, they haven’t gone after that.

      • Silas Marner says:

        The tabloid attacks were more severe after tge tour so the negativity may be an attempt to overshadow her work.

    • Alexandria says:

      I’d add that she’s not some fresh graduate. Aside from acting, she’s had a proven track record of being passionate about philanthropy and feminist issues. Since she had to leave acting, it makes sense that she is pouring herself into the other passion. So the royal ‘work’ is a natural fit instead of an awkward fit and she’s happy to expand on her previous work.

    • Go Placidly says:

      I think it is also to impress on the public that Megan has the queen’s approval – which given the queen’s age is not something that should be put off too long.

    • MA says:

      It’s because she’s clearly capable and the Queen wouldn’t give her these important roles if she weren’t confident in her. It really speaks to her competence and work ethic. She’s not really doing anything different than other BRF royals either (except for…)

  11. Zapp Brannigan says:

    Happy International Women’s Day to women everywhere, and of course to all those who police their hemlines 👗

    • Kaiser says:

      lol, sorry! My reasoning is that I would have said the same about Kate (and have said, repeatedly).

      • Zapp Brannigan says:

        it’s not you Kaiser it’s me! I am still salty having just read about Esther Perel in another post.

    • harla says:

      Thank you, Thank you, Thank you Zapp!!! I hope you don’t mind but I’m going to be cutting and pasting your comment all day today, everywhere I can.

    • JANE says:

      I really don’t understand this type of a jab.
      I’m a woman, I love women, I support women, I’m proud of women, but at the same time I can also not like every outfit a woman wears and it doesn’t mean at all that I’m policing a woman.
      I mostly like Meghan’s outfits, I think she dresses in a professional and appropriate way, except of couple of mishaps here and there.
      She is not trendy or a fashionista, which would be wrong for a member of the BRF, in my opinion, but she mostly chooses modern, but at the same time classic pieces that are not dated like often Kate’s are.
      This dress is very nice and would look much better, if it would be about knee length, especially when she knew that she would be sitting, a bit longer dress or even a pantsuit would have been better.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Jane ITA. I personally think her hemline is too short for this engagement, considering she’s photographed from the front sitting, but I don’t think I’m trashing her or demeaning women by saying this. It’s just an opinion on her dress, nothing more.

      • DS9 says:

        We really should think critically about where the idea of an appropriate hemline came from before dismissing that criticism as valid.

        Who dictates how much leg is appropriate and does the amount of leg showing keep her from doing her job?

        That’s what the discussion of feminism is about, reexamining our assessments of things and sort through where they came from and if it’s a valid concern.

      • minx says:

        Meh, it’s a dress. I think most people here pull for Meghan but we’re allowed to say if we think a dress is too short. I think she looks uncomfortable, the jacket is too tight and the hem isn’t the best.

      • otaku fairy... says:

        @DS9: This. It’s always good to remember what these standards of propriety for women are connected to. Helps keep things in perspective.

      • Nana says:

        Exactly DS9 and otaku fairy…. the point is that we’re discussing women’s hemlines like it’s June Shrimpton at the Melbourne Cup in the 1960s (google the photos/headlines – they’re classic).
        The appropriateness of men’s standard of dress, whether it’s how fitting (or ill-fitting) their clothes are or whether their shirt is a bit too tight or buttoned too low is never broken down in such detail and that’s the problem.
        It’s incredibly baffling that we’re even having this discussion when it’s nearly 2020 and on international women’s day, no less.
        Just because that’s always how it’s been, doesn’t need to mean that’s always how it should be, so how do we get that to change as a society?

    • Avery says:

      What happened with Esther Perel?

      • Lorelei says:

        Yes I’m also curious about Esther Perel now! Off to Google.

        And for the record I adore Meghan and just happen to think this one dress is too short. Discussing fashion worn by royals and other celebrities is a large part of why I visit this site daily. Really not a big deal or a statement about my feelings on feminism 🤷🏻‍♀️

    • Coz' says:

      @zapp and DS9 Thank you!
      I have a very hard time with the constant criticism about what is or isn’t an “appropriate” hemlines.
      Men have been sexualising and shaming our bodies for far too long.
      I wore a short dress at work today and still kicked ass. So did Meghan!
      Kuddos for Kayser for giving Meghan and Kate the same treatment on the subject. And I will keep defending their rights to short hemlines :-)

  12. Oh No says:

    When she sat down, I got nervous for her. But hey, I’m not mad at it. I’m sure she sat down in the dress beforehand and was cool with it. She probably told herself she would cross her ankles but ended up crossing her legs out of habit.

    Still gorgeous and I love how vocal she is about women’s rights

  13. Desolee says:

    I wore stuff like that when I was pregnant working and at a bank. Coworkers complained, not being mean but they wanted to help me dress “better” for my situation. I swear if you’re thin or maybe built/fit that skirt length looks fine , once you have the lady lumps and baby bump people are like uh oh that’s too short it makes me uncomfortable.
    I don’t like Meghan’s personal style when she’s in suits etc. I don’t find it pretty or flattering. But I appreciate that she usually looks professional, and I think she does here too. I assume she can cross her legs so what’s the problem with that length? Her thighs are precious and need to be covered more that the average woman becuase her husband is harry?
    She looks better than usual here. Less contouring/bronzer plus the turtleneck and that hair style is her friend. She looks effortlessly pretty!

    • Desical says:

      To me, the difference is that she is representing the royal family in her official capacity on a formal panel. Most employers have different dress code requirements for these sorts of things. Normal work day or attending the presentation in the audience? Rock on with your cute dress that’s cut on the shorter side. Member of a panel or presenting as a speaker and representing the firm in your official capacity? Formal/conservative business. And she doesn’t get the slack I would give to other working pregnant woman because she has resources like whoa to a. Afford a different dress and b. Consult professional opinions regarding her attire (whether a stylist or protocol official).

    • MA says:

      I remember that when Kate was last pregnant, fashion sites and even this site (which is pretty meh on Kate) said things like “I’m never going to criticize a pregnant woman for what she wears” / “there are fit issues but she’s pregnant so it’s a quibble” / “pregnant women get a pass on everything.” People gave a privileged white woman who’s a literal royal a pass simply because PREGNANT.

      It’s fine if people are being consistent right now but that’s not often the case.

  14. Feebee says:

    I saw the pic and thought oh no, someone going to squeal about the hemline. I didn’t think it’d be you guys.

    • Annie. says:

      Does it surprise you? For real?
      After years of people here complaining about Kate’s?

      • Becks1 says:

        At least people here are consistent?

        I don’t mind this hemline. And I only mind Kate’s shorter ones when they are “flippy” because I don’t like that look in general. I think at any rate. Sometimes I have to go back and see what I said about a certain outfit at the time lol

      • Royalwatcher says:

        I’m just waiting for all the Kate hemline defenders to show up with the same energy for Meghan. Hello? Anyone?

        Where are all the posters who declare they love Kate’s short hemlines, who argue the length is super appropriate, anyone who hates the length is just an old lady, and hey, if you’ve got the legs, you should flaunt them?

        Hello? Bueller? …Bueller?

      • Beetlejuice says:

        Defend your own lady, don’t ask for others to do it for you. You wouldn’t defend Kate so why would her defenders do the same for Meghan?

      • Elisa says:

        + Annie, the amount of double standard is ridiculous.
        I agree with everyone else that the hemline is too short for a panel event. She would have rocked in a pant suit (like the black one she wore a while ago).

    • Lorelei says:

      @Feebee, we can have opinions without you condescendingly referring to it as “squealing.”

      And yes I sometimes do think Kate’s skirts are too short for official engagements in which she’s representing the Queen, so of course I would say the same about Meghan. Some of us here might prefer Meghan but we’re not all hypocrites : )

  15. Nicole says:

    Is it just me or is that pic of the guy leaning in for a kiss on the cheek uncomfortable looking? I’m not a kiss on the cheek greeter though and would find that uncomfortable- especially in a work setting. I wonder if she knows him? Is this a common form of greeting in the UK?

    • Ads says:

      I cringed at that photo too. We do kiss on the cheek here in the UK, but only people we know and are close to – and even then not usually in a professional setting. Unless this dude is a very good friend or a member of extended family I think he was inappropriate in leaning in to kiss her cheek.

      • jan90067 says:

        According to The Fail (I do go for the pics), he’s a former aide to the Queen. So, I guess there’s some familiarity? CB Brits, is this a thing that’s done? I can’t think an aide would lean in and pucker up to Anne?

      • Ohno! says:

        No jan it isn’t and I was rather surprised by that photo.

        And the thought of it happening to Anne made me hoot

    • DailyNightly says:

      I was just wondering about this. Would someone really dare to kiss a member of the RF? I don’t think I have seen anyone outside the family kiss Kate at a work function, and certainly not the Queen.

      • Mia says:

        I’ve seen photos of Diana, Princess of Wales getting kissed at formal events, Pavarotti and Lord Palumbo. Of course they were friends. I would pay money to see someone try to kiss Princess Anne. LOL

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      It wasn’t just you, same reaction here. I’d hate to think he’ll be all, “I stole a kiss from the pretty duchess!” later on.

    • Silas Marner says:

      I hope that was cleared beforehand and we are not looking at a photo of a man behaving inappropriately because Meghan could feel pressured to be polite in public.

      This is real royal protocol where there are rules about how to behave with the royal family member.

    • Lexa says:

      That man is Christopher Geidt—he was the Queen’s Private Secretary from 2007-2017. If I’m remembering this right, there was some talk that Prince Charles had pushed to get him out of that position…?

      • Its Ok says:

        Charles ousted him and Samantha Cohen quit in solidarity with Geidt. The Queen was said to be pretty upset about it, but wanted Charles to start taking over BP PR. The Royal PR machine hasn’t been the same since. It was a huge mistake and all because Charles thinks the PR games he plays actually work.

      • Bren says:

        “Samantha Cohen quit in solidarity with Geidt.”

        Perhaps that’s the reason for the friendly nature of the kiss. They may have met previously through Samantha who is still working with Meghan.

      • Eve says:

        @ Lexa:

        Thank you for the guy’s name! I kind of find him hot.


      • jwoolman says:

        Before I saw the name on the photo, I was wondering why Vladimir Putin was kissing Meghan…. I am really sleep-deprived.

    • RedWeatherTiger says:

      She looks like she’s bracing for impact from that “friendly” kiss. Ewww.

      • Fluffy Princess says:

        I know, she does! Also, if you look in the other pictures while he’s waiting on the sidelines, he is looking at her like she is a tasty morsel. Perhaps it is a greeting between familiar acquaintances, but that particular shot makes it look inappropriate and pervy. I also feel like if he still worked in the Royal PR machine and Harry saw that picture, that he might want to discuss the appropriateness of Mr. Geidt’s “friendly” greeting.

      • Some chick says:

        Yeah, I cringed at that pic. Unfortunate choice for the top level image. Happy International Women’s Day! Same shite/different day.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        That is a total power play by the kisser. He is showing off that he knows her personally and has demonstrated his position by kissing her.

    • MA says:

      I really thought it looked innocent on video. As with most things, everything looks worse captured in a millisecond photo.

  16. Anitas says:

    International Women’s Day has always been a huge deal in ex socialist countries, the West is just catching up now. Although my husband still doesn’t quite understand the difference between this and Mother’s Day apparently.

    • LivePlantsCleanAir says:

      He hasn’t figured out yet that all women are not mothers? There seems to be some work to do right there at home, Anitas. I had to have a strong discussion with my son when he said something a bit snide, also. Seems like men need to be re-educated regularly to balance the real world’s influence. They seem to get lazy, relaxed in their entitlement? Or something…….

      • Anitas says:

        He means well and definitely supports women’s rights, but he congratulates me this morning with a personalized card of me holding our son. I mean…yeah. I also don’t think he thought of congratulating any of his co-workers. So in his mind it’s still something for family members and I have to explain over and over that it’s a political/social occasion, not a family one.

    • Bailie says:

      @ Anitas : I’m originally from former CZECHOSLOVAKIA, we had to march for International Women’s Day in our uniforms every year, often it was really chilly in the morning.
      Socialist and Communists certainly celebrated International Women’s Day and the same time many women were imprisoned by the very same government, because they dared to speak about freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of religion…
      my aunt who was a professor was in prison tortured a beaten for over 16 years and was only released after the collapse of the system.
      Yes, they definitely celebrated WOMEN in ex-socialist countries!

  17. Lara says:

    Yes I thought this was an odd photo to use and show.

  18. Capejob says:

    Look at her copying Kate by wearing two brands that Kate is largely associated with, McQueen & Reiss!

    • Tina says:

      What’s she supposed to wear, sackcloth and ashes?

      • Serpentinefire says:


      • lipstickjangle says:

        I think this is sarcasm for the constant comments about Kate copying Meghan’s look. Just this week we had some posters comment about Kate copying Meghan’s style even though Kate was wearing a coat & boots that she previously owned & had worn on numerous occasions!

      • Heather says:

        Here’s the thing about sack cloth and ashes….if she uses sack cloth and ashes that are handy, she’s using someone else’s resources. If she accepts them as a gift, well, that’s breaking protocol. And if she spends money to get her own sack cloth and ashes, well that’s the taxpayer’s money she’s wasting! Also if she can buy sack cloth and ashes, why doesn’t her father have sack cloth and ashes? (all sarcasm btw)

      • Nic919 says:

        Heather you win the internet today. 😁

    • Va Va Kaboom says:

      There is an unfortunate… symmetry with Kate’s outfit when she visited the Harry Potter museum though.

  19. Laura says:

    I like the dress a lot, but not necessarily for this event. I think the hemline is too short for sitting down in front of a lot of people, and it doesn’t look appropriate for winter weather. If she were wearing this in California just going out and having fun, or even for a casual event during the summer, I think it’d be beautiful.

  20. Flying fish says:

    I agree with most of the comments, the dress is too short and distracting, not got good look for this event.
    I am looking forward to a recap of what was discussed at the event.

  21. Lexa says:

    Agree with others that the dress is too short for an event sitting down in front of an audience, but I like the idea of it. The jacket seems too tight for this stage of pregnancy, though it could just be the shoulders/collar area of the dress adding some extra bulk.

  22. Peanutbuttr says:

    I feel like it’s only recently the holiday is even mentioned in the US. The first time I heard of it was when I was living in Russia

    • BeanieBean says:

      That’s all I really knew of it. I seem to recall seeing parades from various communist countries on the evening news for IWD. Never really quite understood what it was supposed to be about. Bailie above has some interesting comments.

  23. mc135 says:

    How does one reconcile their feminism and working for the firm that’s the very essence of patriarchy and class system, How to you sit on a panel, a position you have because of who you married, to talk about equality and then go home to a palace that everyone else pay for rather they like it or not. This is cute PR, but please don’t talk about equality it’s a disservice to the women who do the work everyday. it’s like Monsanto going on a panel about organic food. Oh and the Meghan fans please don;’t attack me, it’s just my opinion, Happy international women’s day.

    • JInekei says:

      You are right. It is absolute nonsense to put a woman who has her position solely because of who she married on a panel for promoting women’s rights. For pete’s sake one of the other panelists is an actual (former) prime minister. I understand that her notoriety brings attention to the cause, but let her chair the event then, don’t equate her accomplishments to those of the other panelists by treating her as an equal to them.

      • jan90067 says:

        Are you forgetting the letter she wrote to the dishwashing liquid company as an 11 yr old, saying that it shouldn’t show dishwashing as a woman’s chore? AND that got them to change the commercial/ad. Pretty good for a kid.

        And what about speaking at the UN? Her work for women’s menstruation in India?

        While she may not be as accomplished in this field as some of the others, she’s hardly there ONLY because she married into the BRF.

      • mc135 says:

        no one is saying she is not a accomplish woman on her own. But don’t talk about equality when you are a representative of the BRF , a system where she might have to cursty to her infant nephew if her Husband is not in the room. It’s an insult to the women who put their livelihood on the line every for actual equality

      • JInekei says:

        Are you seriously equating the writing of a letter to a company with being the prime minister of a country? Meg might have done a handful of good tasks, like many other celebrities, but she’s at the panel and the VP of the Commonwealth Trust ONLY because of her husband.

      • Elena says:

        I think this quickly became about her instead of the other accomplished panelists. I’m not sure that’s fair to the other women..

    • Tina says:

      Not attacking you, but all of us posting here benefit from various privileges that we have in some way (some of us live in wealthy countries, all of us are literate). Meghan is using the platform that she has (however she achieved it) for good. That’s all any of us can do.

      • mc135 says:

        They are just using their privileges and position to keep their better standing in society and therefore keeping the class system in place. the position as ambassador was created for her husband. it’s very hard to become a diplomat and i’m sure she knows this first hand because she tried. The guy couldn’t even past art in high school but he get to pay diplomat. So no they are not using their platform for the good of everyone else it’s all keeping their privileges in place.

      • Tina says:

        I think that’s a bit unfair. Charles’s Prince’s Trust foundation has accomplished a lot of good for young people in the UK. Heads Together has accomplished a lot for mental health awareness. The royals have a public position because of history and an accident of birth, that’s true, but they’re not taking on causes that perpetuate the class system.

      • Heather says:

        I failed both art and home ec in high school. I work in the ICU now as a nurse. Would you not trust me because I can’t make brownies?

      • mc135 says:

        i’m sure you worked to get your nursing job and have the certification to do it. That’s why you don’t have a art or home ec job. What are his certification to be an diplomat. He didn’t even do one of those bespoke course that privilege people take when they are trying to get a job at the family firm.

      • Mel M says:

        I don’t understand the criticism of her work at all. Yes she’s in a privileged position simply by marriage but it is what it is. Is she supposed to try and dismantle the monarchy by herself or something? Is that what will make you happy? She didn’t grow up privileged like the BRF and she obviously has a passion for this and started trying to do something and make a positive impact on it long before her marriage. She has a much much bigger platform now and she’s trying to use that to be a positive force and bring as much awarebess as possible. Is she supposed to just do nothing? She works = she’s a hypocrite, she doesn’t = she’s lazy living off the public. She’s damned if she does damned if she doesn’t as far as I can tell by these comments. She would be doing this work even if she didn’t marry Harry, not as high profile, but she would. I think she is trying to make the best of it and do as much good as possible now that she has more resources and visibility. I mean what are the royals jobs anyway? If she’s not doing it right then I don’t know who does. We can talk until we’re blue in the face about how the whole institution needs to be tossed but it hasn’t and it won’t be anytime soon so why can’t she try and make the best of it?

    • Silas Marner says:

      You can say that about every member of inherited privilege and their partners. Gatekeeping how they can participate ignores the wealth and connections they can bring to the table. Reducing their disproportionate influence is a valid goal but leaving them out is not reflective of current circumstances

      • MrsBump says:

        We live, very unfortunately in an age, where celebrity and position automatically entitles those who possess them, to megaphone through which to air their views, often louder and more stridently than others who are perhaps more knowledgeable.
        What better example of this worship of celebrity & wealth than the election of Trump.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      We all have privilege of some kind dear. It’s about what you do with it.

      • MA says:

        +1 – Correct, we all do, including countless other royals and celebrities. Yet somehow only “certain” people are singled out for being bad feminists / not curing the world of its problems. I wonder why that is.

    • Penny says:

      Except she championed equality before marrying Harry so it’s something she’s actually worked towards.

      • mc135 says:

        She did and that’s fine everyone knows that. But working for the BRF firm and lecturing others about equality is an oxymoron

      • Tina says:

        Hypocrisy is not limited to the royals. Pretty much every celebrity who is involved in environmental causes takes private jets.

      • Herta says:

        Currently Meghan is working in royal duties and riding royal nepotism at the same time.

    • Amy Too says:

      I both agree and disagree with the idea that it’s hard to reconcile the fact that she’s on a feminist panel talking about equality yet the only reason she’s there is because she married into the highest of the upper class and most privileged families. I think it’s not horribly hypocritical, though, because Meghan really seems to have the right attitude, experience/track record, political/social views, and aptitude for feminist work. If we were going to hold auditions for the role of a royal family duchess whose duties would include sitting on feminist panels and talking about equality, I would hire Meghan based on her previous social justice work, attitude, experience, aptitude, and other qualifications. She’s good at this job and is likely better suited to it than some wealthy, white, aristocratic daughter of privilege would be.

      I think it would be even more hypocritical and difficult to reconcile if the person sitting on the feminism panel was a born-in royal. Someone who really would only be there because of the family they were born into and despite not needing to ever show that they held the right attitude, had aptitude for the work, had experience in working towards equality, or had even ever thought about feminism. If they had put The Queen or Princess Anne or William on the panel that would be hugely hypocritical and cringe-worthy.

  24. girl_ninja says:

    Gosh she’s gorgeous. Pretty dress.

  25. Lucia says:

    I feel like Meghan’s dress would work a lot better if she weren’t pregnant. I love it, but el bump feels like it’s in the way.

    On a non Meghan related note, can I just say that I find the video of Queen Elizabeth posting to Instagram to be pretty adorable?

    • PrincessK says:

      Well l think that Meghan is trying to be economical. I bet we get to see her wear that dress when she is not pregnant and because she won’t have a bump the dress will be longer in length. I am more interested in the fact that Meghan is centre stage again. Over 14k comments in the stupid DM but it shows that presently she is the most powerful member of the RF. She is the person people want to meet, she is the person people want to be seen with. Quite amazing given the fact that she is 8 months pregnant. Meghan’s confidence and strength continues to amaze me. I also believe the palace insider who said that she has more IQ than the whole RF put together.

      • Lady D says:

        Fourteen thousand comments? Is the press still threatening not to cover her because she’s irrelevant and he’s only sixth in line? LOL

  26. Britt says:

    As always there were thousands of hateful comments on the Daily Mail about this. One of them that just baffled me was saying it looks like Meghan doesn’t bathe.


    I wore dresses like this when I was pregnant. She looks great. And if this was Kate, people would be praising her. It’s so stupid.

    • jan90067 says:

      Eh, I remember Kate getting sh!t because she wore that short polka-dot number; she was about 8 mos. pregnant. She wore a LOT of shorter outfits throughout the pregnancy.

      Scroll through: https://www.aol.com/article/lifestyle/2018/11/06/kate-middleton-meghan-markle-short-dresses-pregnancies/23581626/##slide=7462200#fullscreen

      It’s 2019. Let’s STOP policing women’s hemlines and bodies. Change starts with ourselves!

      • Louisa says:

        Sorry but this is not about policing but about etiquette in a professional context. Men don’t sit on panels in hot pants and women should not almost expose their butt. At least if they want the focus to be on their message and not on their thighs. I had to learn myself the hard way that dresses that might look decent while standing up, look quite differently if you are sitting cross-legged and especially up on a stage as it is for most panel discussions. I am sure Meghan will learn this too. Either wearing dresses a few inches longer or just paying more attention to the way she sits.

      • Herta says:

        I agree.
        Dress as you like but there is such a thing as a professional style for all things business and a free and fun and private style.

        Ruth Bader Ginsburg wouldn’t wear such a short dress for any occasion. Her fashion style provides a good guideline for professional style.

    • LoveBug says:

      Sorry, but no. I have critiqued Kate’s hemlines countless times on this very site and I’m definitely not alone.
      In my opinion there is a time and place for everything. I love, love wearing a lovely pair of shorts that I got in the Bahamas, so much so that I got two more pairs on line. But never in a million years would I put them on to go to work in my downtown office and they are not shorts, shorts for sure and I have inherited my moms long, long slim legs and lean body.
      The same way I would certainly not like, if my male engineer colleague would show up to work in a white wife beater top – TIME and PLACE!!!
      Feminism does not mean that women can do whatever, wear whatever and behave like guys, because the rational I sometimes hear is, oh but a guy can do a stupid thing, so why can’t a woman.
      What ridiculous thinking.

      • DS9 says:

        A tank top is not on the same footing as a short hemline. The male equivalent of a too short hemline would be suit pants on a man that are too short or too tight, both of which men do constantly with little commentary.

        We don’t find the fit of a man’s suit terribly distracting because we aren’t conditioned to. Lord knows I’ve encountered fine ass men whose poorly fit has given me the flutters in my nether regions but we don’t police their dress, we police our responses.

      • Jane'sWastedTalent says:

        DS9- No, a man wearing a too tight suit is the equivalent of a woman wearing a too tight suit. Both short skirts and tank tops expose flesh that no one else wants to see, thus are also equivalent.

    • Some chick says:

      “Dirty” has a long history of being used as a slur against POC. It’s a dogwhistle word.

    • PrincessK says:

      The comments on DM about Meghan are written by a mixture of racists and jealous lunatics. I remember reading one comment which referred to Meghan’s ‘ gnarled fingers twisted over Harry’s hand’. At times you just feel sorry for these people who can’t bear to see how much these two love each other.

  27. Kk2 says:

    I like the dress but would also prefer with a slightly longer hemline. Part of it is when you wear a blazer (especially a longer/not cropped blazer) it makes the dress look shorter. I am 7 months pregnant and veto’d a similar outfit on myself when I was getting dressed the other day- the Blazer emphasized the sightly shorter hemline and made it look less appropriate even though it should have been fine.

    I also suspect it’s a non maternity dress that is riding up bc of the bump. It happens, but it really shouldn’t happen to her with her resources.

    Overall it’s still fine, but would have been a great outfit with an inch or two more on the skirt.

  28. Citresse says:

    Not a secretary look ;-) by all accounts.
    MM’s legs look fantastic now. That’s a good thing.
    As for baby Sussex, still hoping for a girl on this Intl Women’s Day and MM and Harry name her Victoria.

    • Ju says:

      I’d take Kate’s secretary look over Meghan almost flashing her vulva, any day 😉
      (check out the picture of her sitting down!)

      • Citresse says:

        Kate’s worst vulva exposure was in Canada of all nations.
        India tour windy day for Kate will forever be known as the most aggravated vulva exposure attempt so far.

      • lubbylou says:

        Slight exaggeration me thinks and what has this to do with Kate?

      • Beli says:

        We have literally seen Kate’s bare behind while she was on public engagements. And on one occasion very nearly her front too, when she was representing the Queen in a foreign country. Her skirts and wind do not mix well.

      • Herta says:

        Duchesses’ competition in flashing crotch and calves?

      • MA says:

        @Ju – What an ugly thing to say

      • Casey20 says:

        Know one remembers all the fashion “not again” from The English Rose…

    • PrincessK says:

      Yes, Meghan has always referred to her skinny legs, and l am sure she likes how pregnancy has fattened them out. Go girl and show your legs if you want to.

  29. tempest prognosticator says:

    I like what the woman in the black and white checked jacket is wearing. Meghan’s dress is ok, but yeah, it’s a bit short when she sits. Apparently, for some, this distracts from the message.

  30. Ashby says:

    Jane, I also think that her dress is too short here, it is very visible when she is sitting. I don’t think this dress was a good choice to sit in on a panel. A longer dress, skirt or even a simple pants suit would have been more professional looking and appropriate. I love mini skirts, but I only put them on for a fun night on the town with friends and also at the beach. In my opinion, time and place in very, very important. I love my bikinis, but they are not suitable to have on at the opera.

  31. Jan says:

    I’m a big Meghan fan, but sheesh lady just wear some GD hosiery with this dress.

  32. Jb says:

    Ok I know we need to talk about all the great WORDS and amazing women but this dress seems like such a huge miss today. Was are her amazing black pants? She could have rocked that look. On stage, legs crossed…sadly, as another person said the talk will veer to thighs as opposed to policy. And maybe if she wore a suit that would happen as well. I don’t know…

  33. DS9 says:

    I truly do not understand much of the commentary here. It’s International Women’s Day and we are still stuck on patriarchal programming on what is appropriate for a women, a pregnant woman to wear in public.

    I don’t know why she didn’t wear pants. Perhaps most don’t fit right. She could buy more, sure but how long will those fit and perhaps she feels she has enough clothes. Certainly the tabloids do.

    Maybe the dress fit right last week and today the baby is sitting higher or all the way to the left and it doesn’t.

    Or maaaaybe she doesn’t think it’s very scandalous or damaging to her standing at this event for the world to see this much of a duchess’s legs. Nor does the skirt length physically keep her from doing the tasks on her agenda today.

    And i’m not interested in hearing what men wear either. Men aren’t pregnant, have a wider variety of options available to them, can wear the same thing every day without controversy, commentary, or even notice and I don’t recall hearing Harry’s wardrobe costs discussed either. We also do not put this much energy unto the fit of a man’s clothes either.

  34. Lala11_7 says:

    “She’s got legs, she knows how to use them….She never begs, she knows how to choose them”

    Anything that evokes ZZ Top…is a HECKY YEA from me!!!!

  35. Cerys says:

    If the dress was a little longer, this would be a lovely and appropriate outfit for the occasion.

  36. CindyP says:

    Dress way too short, should have worn tights & boots.

  37. HK9 says:

    When I saw the hemline I thought there are going to be a gagillion comments about how it’s too short. (I don’t care it’s a nice dress) and I wasn’t disappointed….

  38. Zazu says:

    I had an argument with an older friend of the family who was talking about male judges perceiving women in court occasionally appearing in mini dresses as deliberately attempting to manipulate them through sex appeal, and throwing them out!

    I shot this down pretty fast, saying that it’s up to the men to control themselves and not police the women in the room. Shaming women has been a long time tactic of the patriarchy.

    However, we live in a world with socially constructed norms about these pieces of fabric we call clothes and what they signify in different contexts. So for men, signifying respect in context of courtroom, wedding Etc would be to wear a tie or bow tie with a formal suit. Cargo shorts and a tie-dye T-shirt would be inappropriate. Dyed green hair and a denim jacket wouldn’t fly in a law firm or corporate business engagement. The same norms about signifying respect for a formal occasion, dressing to be perceived as powerful, or dressing to be seen as relaxed apply to women. For both genders, being more covered up is perceived as signifying respect for an occasion or in the role of a powerful executive.

    The problem is that with women these norms have gotten all entangled with trying to control their bodies and their sexuality in a patriarchal society.

    I’m not sure it’s really possible to extricate the issues completely but I think it’s fair to say that clothes are means of social communication and we don’t get dressed in a vacuum just expressing ourselves individually. So if a dress that would be normally associated with a relaxed summer garden party or flirty date is worn in a different context then people will criticize it for communicating the wrong thing.

    So I don’t think criticizing the hemline is the way to go because that just gets us into the sexual control issue. It’s more that the style isn’t as formal I personally think she should have chosen, more to dress in a power suit type of way to communicate her seriousness and ability to flex her role on the issues she she’s talking about today.

    • Herta says:

      If it were true that women can always wear what they want then you could appear in court in an itsy bitsy bikini and expected to be taken as seriously as when you are wearing a women’s business suit.
      I support that women should be allowed to dress as they like.
      I do also support that you should somewhat dress for the occasion. Female lawyer wearing beach wear in court isn’t going to cut it. Duchess who got promoted by nepotism (Queen promoted her to Women’s Day and more) displaying her upper calves during a talk on feminism and equality isn’t going to cut it either.

      • otaku fairy... says:

        Ok but in what universe is a dress like this the same as a bikini in court on a lawyer? TBH, I think the fact that she went to a talk on feminism and equality in a dress that doesn’t quite meet patriarchal standards of respectability is rather fitting.

      • MA says:

        +1 Otaku fairy. Criticisms are one thing, but equating this to a bikini is ridiculous. Something tells me those making over-the-top criticisms like this are not the type of women who support other women or support feminism.

    • Elisa says:

      this is interesting. I have a male colleague at work who feels hot all the time and he complaint about not being able to wear cargo pants / shorts to the office in summer. He is now allowed to do so (nice ones, not the military style ones). Talking to him made me aware that women actually have more choice when it comes to clothing. Imagine a guy sitting in this panel baring his legs. ;)
      So you’re right, these norms affect both genders.

  39. Mego says:

    I might get flamed for this but my issue isn’t the short hemline here per se, it’s that it’s an outfit I would expect to have a longer hemline. It just looks off to me proportionally and it’s jarring.

  40. Bace says:

    Lovebug, I agree with you, the dress is too short. If the hemline would be a bit past her knees, it would have looked great. Meghan usually is dresses nice, but the hemline doesn’t work for me here.

  41. Deedee says:

    Past her knees would look matronly and out of proportion with the jacket.

  42. Casey20 says:

    What I like about Meghan is that she is changing the discussion. Like her or not, she turning the discussion away from what she wears to what she’s talking about….Let’s not go backwards, please!

  43. Salty says:

    As I said in another post today. This is not about patriarchy or controlling a woman dress or body. This is about what’s appropriate to wear in a British culture. As someone mentioned above there are certain expectations of dress for certain occassions. Every culture has them. If Harry were to go to an event like this and wear short shorts where we could see up his leg almost to his yiu know what we would be talking about it and say it was inappropriate. Is that policing his body. Difference is men usually accept cultural norms and go with it. Suits to wedding etc. If they don’t they are considered rude. How about your male relatives wearing shorts and a tank to your wedding? Everyone ok with that? Or would we try to police his body. This dress was too short women can’t wear whatever they want and still expect to be respected just as men can’t. Cultural norms apply in whatever country try you are in and this is Britain.

    • Casey20 says:

      Salty. She’s dressed appropriate for British culture. Some will find anything to focus on but her words. It’s sad when it comes from women…so sad! Focus on the substance and not the clothes.

    • DS9 says:

      She’s wearing a sheath dress and a blazer.

      Your shirt and shorts analogy doesn’t work because hemlines are not garments but fitting choices within a garment.

      When Harry shows up in a less than stellar fitting suit, we don’t hear a peep

      • Herta says:

        I don’t have a problem with short skirts. Women’s day is about emancipation and equality especially in professional work life. Meghan’s dress which is in fact so short you can see all her upper calf in that picture show when she crossed her legs. It doesn’t say “take me seriously” but it says “ain’t my calves sexy”!

        I would like some good statements on feminism and equality and progress in those matters. Don’t want to see her calves.

      • Salty says:

        it was not about the fit but the length how about if Harry wore pants cut to way above his thighs you can bet it would make headlines. After all it’s just the hem right the hem of the pants was just a bit to short. Lol. Nice try though. Or how about too tight pants on Harry where you could outline everything. Yes we would all talk about it. Problem is when people wear something that’s not appropriate it does take over the conversation regardless of what they intended. Can’t imagine what she was thinking knowing she had to sit down and being pregnant and all. And for British culture this dress is fine for casual meeting but not formal ones.

      • DS9 says:

        @Herta, do you know what calves are?

      • Casey20 says:

        DS9….just LOL

    • Otaku fairy... says:

      Why the binary thinking tho? It’s both about cultural standards of propriety in dress AND patriarchal standards of female propriety. To deny the overlap between the two is a little obtuse. When there’s misogyny in a culture (and it looks like there is in most human cultures), it can touch just about any and every area of life for women. Female modesty is definitely one of those areas. That can be seen just by looking at things people think they’re entitled to say…and do…. and not do…when it looks like girls or women aren’t complying with those standards. This is also another reason why it’s problematic to equate men being expected to wear suits with the coercive and authoritarian way standards of female sexual modesty in dress are pushed for women.
      Respecting or disrespecting others is a choice. Refusing to take accountability for how we choose to treat other women (or just women, in case you’re a male) with an excuse like, “her immodesty makes me disrespectful in my attitude and treatment of her” reflects more on us than it does on the woman in question. If someone thinks Meghan Markle’s dress is hurting their ability to respect her or the rest of us, they didn’t have much respect for women to begin with. It also enables abusers. #SlutWalk forever. Happy International Women’s day & good night. 🌙

    • MA says:

      Making this about “British culture” is truly eyeroll-inducing. Plenty of leading British celebrities, royals, models have worn much shorter/more revealing/more edgy things than a short sheath. FFS. Criticize it all you won’t but don’t blow this out of proportion with demonstrably untrue statements like that.

  44. Herta says:

    Somehow Meghan’s look and body language don’t say “serious business” nor “professional”.

    • Casey20 says:

      Listen with your ears and try not to be so judgemental on the clothes of an 8 month pregnant woman

    • MA says:

      Somehow I get the feeling that it’s not her “look” and “body language” for you. Can’t qwhite put my finger on it…

  45. Yoyo says:

    The video of this conference, was enlightening, hearing the different reasons why the panel started their work, instead of all that time talking about the length of Meghan’s dress, what a waste.

  46. BPM says:

    My mother in law was a feminist and an activist in the Teacher’s Union in the 60s,70s and 80s. She passed away yesterday on International Women’s Day. We were looking at old photos of her last night and there was a photo of her from the 1980s wearing an International Women’s Day t-shirt.
    RIP Betty.

  47. BeanieBean says:

    Outfit wise, she’s dressing like a lot of pregnant women I have seen. Still wearing the non-maternity clothes, even when they’ve become too small & uncomfortable.

  48. Mego says:

    Despite my shameful pearl clutchy initial reaction to her hemline I think she does look lovely and I love her hair. Cosmo featured a comparison with an outfit Kate wore in 2013 when pregnant that was similar to this. Kate looked good too but think she wore hosiery.

  49. Kath says:

    Just realised that our first female PM Julia Gillard is sitting next to Meghan at this function. Probably the only PM in my lifetime who hasn’t turned out to be a complete a-hole.

  50. MA says:

    It’s really interesting how Sophie and Camilla also celebrated Internationals Women’s Day, yet no one is dragging them for “hypocritically” promoting women and feminism even though they’re extremely privileged white women. Here we have the only WOC in the BRF, the only one who’s ever had to work to support themselves, who’s used the position of privilege and platform she’s been granted to advocate equality… yet somehow we’re now denigrating efforts from privileged people to contribute good to society? I guess it would be better for some if Meghan were a “seen but not heard” royal who didn’t care about women’s issues or diversity and didn’t use her privileged platform for anything of use? How incredibly regressive.

    I guess with that logic, the William & Kate shouldn’t take up causes like homelessness like they did yesterday because they all own a dozen palaces. Or no celebrity and Charles should care about the environment because they fly private.

    • Casey20 says:

      Are you kidding, they would complain about that. IMO, an American out performing the English Rose is the problem. It’s sad because Kate is who she is and so is Meghan. Kate loves sports and pouring beer, nothings wrong with that. Meghan has always had a voice. She’s just on the world stage now and I’m certain she isn’t going anywhere…..so hate on people!

  51. Salty says:

    Thanks to the poster who sent me back to the dress that Kate wore while she was pregnant that was quite similar to this. And 321 comments on celebitchy. You want a sample of the remarks?? Why not. “ OMG that dress IS inappropriately short”. “ I think her shorter hemlines would be better if she didn’t always wear them with high heeled pumps”. “Too short, too much thigh. Too tarty” For someone who fought for ten years to get the role she has now. Flouting the rules like she dies now will come back to haunt her. The queen is famous for sitting back and waiting for the right moment”. It is quite the read. So I guess it’s not just Neghan that gets blasted.

  52. D says:

    I don’t think she looks very polished or professional. Also her look (clothes. Hair) and body language are too casual. She is at work and representing the royal family. While she is a very pretty woman. I think she looks too casual here. The hair looks very unpolished for a royal family member at an official event. I think it looks a bit spring like. And I just don’t understand the bare leg thing this time of year.

    • Casey20 says:

      Have you ever been 8 months pregnant? Your body changes often. It’s a lot of hit and miss. Give her brake on this one. Now what about the substance?

      • Linda says:

        Oh please there are thousands of eight months pregnant women who have to work every day and manage to dress professionally with limited resources.

    • Case20 says:

      Sure Linda and Meghan is one of them. At some point women need to stop judging each other on superficial things and focus on the substance. Did you HEAR her words or did you just judge her clothes?

  53. Goofpuff says:

    Kate’s shorter hemlines comments were because she was already consistently having flasher moments with her bits. You would think after having it happen once in international media she would not want it to happen again but yep kept not caring about the exposure. That to me is unprofessional.

    Just like i’m not interested in seeing men’s underwear showing at work, I don’t want to see women’s either.

    I for one think people should shove it with the short hemlines and high heels crap for both women. Stop enforcing prudish patriarchal notions on people. It’s not a miniskirt. It rides up when you are preggo and walking. It’s like an inch maybe two over her knee while walking. Gawd.

  54. Princessk says:

    I am so proud of Meghan. I have just watched everything she said on video. This girl is intelligent. I knew it before but watching her answer questions so clearly and eloquently, and thinking on her feet was a bit of a master class on how to do well as a panellist. She very deftly side stepped any questions which could lead to ‘controversy’ but at the same time made her points very strongly and succinctly. Harry must be in awe of her, I really don’t know the last time the Palace had a member of the RF with such skills and confidence. Probably why her arrival has set them all in a spin. But I actually think that the Queen, and Charles are having a chuckle as it has put the RF very much in the international arena again, and who would have thought that Harry who was supposed to marry a blonde bimbo would attract a lady with such an IQ and importantly a serious work ethic.

    I see William being the most alarmed, now that Harry has a partner who knows how to stand her ground and give no room any longer for William to trample over him.

    For me the short dress, which is only short because of her bump, signals that you don’t have to wear trousers and business outfits to be a feminist.

  55. FredsMother says:

    Jaysus H Khrist. All this talk about hemline. Did you all even here the Duchess speak at this event. Gender neutralusing feminism. It is a team effort, men are part if the effort too… Her husband certainly is, she says. It’s about parity and man feeling empowered when his woman stands beside him as equal. 👍👍👌👌👌👌. Brilliant, articulate speaker, the Duchess of Sussex!!!!

    Today I just don’t care what she wears. She can have her narrow behind hanging out and I would not care as long as she is representing me and my daughter and our future like this.🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌