Duchess Meghan stepped out in jeans to watch Serena Williams at Wimbledon

Embed from Getty Images

Have you noticed something kind of funny and suspicious about the Duchess of Sussex’s movements? We knew ahead of time that Meghan was going to try to see one of Serena Williams’ matches, and I even suggested that Meghan try to come to an early match this year, because God knows how Serena will perform. Meghan waited a few days until… after her sister-in-law had already gone to Wimbledon for an entire day. Duchess Kate was at the All-England Club on Tuesday to see Harriet Dart, Roger Federer and Serena’s matches, and to meet other British players in her capacity as patroness to the club. So when Meghan showed up on Thursday, no one could say sh-t because Kate had already done it (this year). I believe this is what racers call “drafting.”

So yes, Meghan was in the house for Serena’s Thursday match. Serena and Roger were both put on Court 1, which doesn’t have a Royal Box (the Royal Box is only on Center Court). So Meghan just sat in the stands like a normal peasant (much like Kate did on Tuesday). Meghan brought two friends, Lindsay Roth and Genevieve Hillis, both of whom she’s known since their college days at Northwestern. Meghan wore jeans, a black tee and a L’Agence blazer which was a repeat. She also wore a new Jennifer Meyer “A” initial necklace – A for Archie. The Daily Mail noted: “Although there is no official dress code at Wimbledon, many spectators choose to dress up – particular for Centre Court and Court One – so Meghan’s decision to wear denim may have raised some eyebrows.” The Royal Box has a dress code, but if you’re seated anywhere else, you can wear whatever you want, even shorts or sweatpants.

Many people believe that Meghan’s college friends are in town because of Archie’s christening, which is tomorrow at Windsor Castle. The christening will be held at the private family chapel at Windsor, and all the Sussexes are promising is that they’ll release photos once the christening is done. Which is fine, although I kind of hoped they would allow for “arrivals” too. But that’s the old controversy. The new controversy is “why won’t the Sussexes name Archie’s godparents?!!?”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will keep the identity of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor’s godparents a secret, it has emerged, as they confirm his private christening service will go ahead on Saturday. The couple, whose son will be baptised exactly two months from his birth, have insisted that the names of his godparents will remain hidden “in keeping with their wishes”.

The decision is a marked departure from traditional royal christenings, which have generally seen the palace announce limited details for the public historic record including the names of the family and friends entrusted with the infant’s spiritual wellbeing. A spokesman for the Sussexes said that they “look forward” to sharing select photographs, taken on the day by personal photographer Chris Allerton, afterwards.

The announcement inspired speculation that a celebrity or public figure may be involved in the ceremony, as well as senior members of the Royal Family. Sources indicated that assumption was wide of the mark, with the couple said to have chosen an unknown number of friends on either side.

[From The Telegraph]
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/07/03/duke-duchess-sussex-rule-archies-godparents-will-remain-secret/

After Serena won her match, she was asked if she was a godmother or if she would attend Archie’s christening, and she shrugged off the question and said she was busy on Saturday (she’ll be playing her third round match). I think it’s far more likely that a few godparents were chosen from Meghan’s friends or extended Ragland family (NOT any of the White Markles) and they simply didn’t want to be targeted by the British media. As in, Meghan didn’t want to put some private-citizen college friend in the position of having to face blaring Daily Mail headlines about how, say, Genevieve Hillis’s cousin’s mother-in-law’s neighbor ran a meth lab and how dare Meghan expose Archie to such a person?

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

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

229 Responses to “Duchess Meghan stepped out in jeans to watch Serena Williams at Wimbledon”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Flying fish says:

    Nice to see the Duchess out and about with her friends.

    • bamaborn says:

      Agree!

    • Mab's A'Mabbin says:

      Imagine a world where that’s enough to say and feel.

    • JanetDR says:

      It is! Also, she looks terrific -love the whole look.

      • LahdidahBaby says:

        I love this look, too. It’s Meghan being herself, and with all the critics in the press weighing in on everything she does, I applaud that.

    • Moose says:

      Meghan looks fantastic, she’s not in the Centre Court Royal Box so jeans are acceptable, she looked very relaxed and happy, happy with her life, happy to be with her friends, and happy to be watching another friend win at Wimbledon…. Love the necklace too…

  2. Becks1 says:

    I was surprised at the jeans as well, but I know nothing about Wimbledon, so if there’s no dress code for where she was sitting then it makes sense. I thought overall she looked great.

    Jessica Mulroney is def going to the christening, and I’m sure these two women are going to be there as well. All godmothers?

    Richard Palmer did have an interesting bit about how this actually does “break protocol,” but apparently the Royal family always breaks this protocol. The godparents are required to be registered in the church records but the royal family uses a private royal register or something so their godparents are never official public knowledge, we only know bc they announce it. I know, I know, Richard Palmer, but still interesting.

    The announcement about the christening came from BP itself, so I’m sure the powers that be are okay with it (not announcing the names.)

    • Erinn says:

      I think the jeans would have been better if they were a little bit darker, but I think she looks great here. She has really good casual/elevated casual looks.

    • Eliza says:

      The only dress code, I thought it was real, but maybe it’s implied… is not to wear a hat out of courtesy of those behind you.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I’ve been to Wimbledon a few times, the dress code for the Royal box and Centre Court only. Much ado about nowt really.

    • Millenial says:

      Watching Richard Palmer doing his stiff upper lip version of foaming at the mouth on Twitter this morning because what Harry and Meghan are doing is ILLEGAL would be comical if it wasn’t so sad (seriously it was like, 10 tweets long). But really, this man needs a new job where he doesn’t get so worked up. Can’t be healthy.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Millenial – I agree. I used to follow him and then stopped because he really does hate Meghan. I only saw this bc someone else retweeted it. I thought it was interesting bc he did actually criticize the queen for it as well.

      • Lady D says:

        Hopefully the dude’s developing an ulcer a year. Maybe a few ‘roids from sitting on his ass with his phone while foaming at the mouth.

      • Molly says:

        As an American, I must say….I don’t get it! If Archie has no title why do the British People feel they need to see 2 mins of them walking in and out of the church. It all seems crazy. I watched the Christening video of Louis and the RF completely ignored the media. Even little Charlotte made a nasty remark to the reporters.

      • Tina says:

        The British people do not care. The royal reporters care.

  3. portobadisco11 says:

    Lindsay Roth lives in London

    • Harpersghost says:

      So Meghan has a college friend living in London? Good for her!

      They probably haven’t been all that close over the years, but it’s good to have SOMEONE who knows her from the pre-Royalty days around who she can touch base with. Even if it’s only having lunch every few months. It’s nice that she has someone that’s not her husband’s friends or family.

      My sister did that, where she moved across the US to be with a boyfriend, because that’s where he was from. So their entire social life was based upon him: his family, his old friends, etc. She was so much happier when a few of her college friends moved out there.

      • Sam says:

        Theyve always been close.They went on holiday in 2016,Lindsey was there for her wedding,She posted about the cookbook and was at the baby shower

      • Peg says:

        Meghan was Lindsey maid of honor, that NorthWestern group are a tight bunch, only backstabber Priddy is on the outside of the group.

  4. Kittycat says:

    It’s so sad that Archie’s godparents had to ask to be kept anonymous.

    The British media is completely insane at this point.

    But I think it will get worse when they realize the media will not be at Archie’s first day of school, and other money making events.

    • Britt says:

      They truly have lost the plot. I’ve seen open letters, rants in columns and twitter. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you and trash a couple for years and expect them to give you access to them and their child. They are fuming because they can’t make money off House Sussex. I thought they weren’t important and that Meghan needed to step back and not be the star? This press doesn’t have the guts to admit that they need those two because the others including the Cambridge’s aren’t selling that well. The press is feeling shunned and unimportant because with social media, they’re becoming irrelevant.

    • AprilMay says:

      Its sad isnt it? People kept saying the media would leave them alone, but theyve already started dissecting Lindsay and Genevieve’s lives. and the trolls are out for them too.

    • starryfish29 says:

      The Brit media will stop at nothing, they already made a living hell out of the life of the woman they baselessly claimed was Meghan’s doula, it’s totally understandable that these two would want to protect their actual friends from facing the same onslaught. The RRs have had the knives out since day one and sadly it seems it won’t get any better, it’s really gross.

    • Olenna says:

      Agree, and the RRs are seething while trying to declare a private religious ceremony is a really a public celebration that the people should enjoy as well. I had to laugh at Becky English who made a complete fool of herself on Twitter over the godparents’ wanting privacy and having no photos of the guests.

      • sandy says:

        A baptism isn’t usually a private ceremony. In many churches, including the episcopal tradition, it’s held publicly during weekly services with the entire congregation present. While that may not be possible here, H&M are making what is usually very public into something very private.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        Sandy
        To make this christening public would be out of the norm. Some churches have them public. Many have them private. It varies. Mine was private. I’ve sat through some random public ones. The BRF are always private in these events.

      • LindaM says:

        Wrong Sandy. All royal christening, except one, were private. The only difference with Archie’s is no press photos of arrivals and departures (this was started by the Cambridge’s and not some long standing tradition) and privacy of godparents. Don’t blame the Sussex’s for not wanting their friends harassed by the media and trolls.

      • Olenna says:

        @Sandy, I was raised in the church and understand the significance and meaning of a christening and baptism. Further, I know these ceremonies can be public or private, based on the wishes of the family or individual. To my knowledge, the British royals do not hold public christening ceremonies in the monarch’s chapels. They are by invitation only. But, if you have evidence that the royals do, in fact, conduct all their christenings in ceremonies open to the public, then please provide it.

      • sandy says:

        I specifically said that a public ceremony isn’t possible, but usually there is some form of public recognition. There’s no denying that. The whole idea is that you are proclaiming your child as a member of a church—how is that private?

      • Olenna says:

        @Sandy, you specifically said, “H&M are making what is usually very public into something very private.” Did you not know these ceremonies can be public or private, and one does not need to announce to the public a person’s soul has been cleansed and committed to the Church and God? Did you not realize it was the tabloid press who released the BP media communications memo which, BTW, was meant for the press, not the public? The Sussexes apparently planned to have a private ceremony and maybe release a photo themselves, which is their prerogative. Counting the birth announcement, this is the second time the press has done this in order to stir up RR support and animosity in that small community of small-minded people who do not like Meghan. And, like lemmings, the anti-Meghan stalkers fell for the RR outrage when they didn’t get all the info they wanted.

      • CairinaCat says:

        Nope, both my kids had private ceremonies in the Episcopal Church. No one I know of has ever had a public ceremony. The royals don’t either.

  5. Melissa Manifesto says:

    I admired Meghan much more before when she was an actress but now I feel like there’s this need or dare I say, delusion to change the Royal Family. Though it may feel good to rough some feathers, I hope all of these “private” decision don’t come back to hunt her and Harry in the end. She’s part of the firm whether she likes it or not.

    P.S. Please don’t come after me for criticizing Meghan, I’m currently writing this while laying on a sofa bed next to my mother who is recovering from a stroke in the hospital. I’m visiting this site because I need a form of distraction.

    • Joja says:

      First the queen is the chief of this firm.And Harry and Meghan are under her authority in buckingham palace.If she disagrees with anything she just have to put a stop.But she doesn’t….

      The press tried to enter in the house of her mother and friends.They started vilified Jessica Mulroney.With all the hit pieces they wrote about her are you really surprise that her and HARRY don’t want to share anything with the press?

      I am sure the love the peoples but they sure have a high level of disdain for British tabloids

    • Becks1 says:

      I hope your mother recovers quickly!

      I wonder, with some of these privacy concerns (like the godparents), how much of that would have happened had the press not attacked her for the past year. I figure she expected some criticism, but probably not this level, and I can see her figuring “you know what, no, you don’t get to see a picture of my baby after you spent my pregnancy harassing me.”

      I also think that this is exactly why they skipped a title for Archie.

    • BaronSamedi says:

      I can see where you’re coming from but I think that ‘delusion to change the Royal Family’ is mostly made up by the press. Harry and Meghans children will have the same status as the York girls essentially. Did anyone really care who their Godparents were?

      I don’t see them trying to ‘not’ being part of the firm what with their own foundation etc. They’re just setting some reasonable boundaries about things that really don’t matter in the grand scheme of things since Harry is not going to be King and their children are seriously far back in line.

      • HMC says:

        I think Archie will have the same status as Princess Anne’s children, who are untitled as well. There may be a bit more attention on Archie, poor kid,

        But can anyone name all the godparents of Zara’s children? Or Peter’s children? Was there such an uproar when the godparents weren’t announced?

        This is just another episode of “Meghan Can’t Do Anything Right Because Of Reasons.”

      • Blue Orange says:

        I agree, in the long term, there won’t be much interest in Harry, Meghan or Archie but there clearly is interest at the moment and it’s confusing that some people make out that there isn’t. They’re the new, shiny toy for the press. I read above someones comment ‘don’t bit the hand that feeds you’. Well that works both ways. The press will leave them alone eventually so they just have to ride out the wave but when that attention is gone, I’m not sure they’re going to be so happy with their privacy. Look at how Andrew now spends his days attention seeking.

    • Seraphina says:

      I don’t think it’s so much that she wants to Charente the BRF, but I think she and Harry know the plans that Charles has (streamlining BRF). And so baby steps have begun to place boundaries and set that in place.

      I hope your mother recovers soon from her stroke and regains her health fully.

    • Seraphina says:

      I don’t think it’s so much that she wants to Charente the BRF, but I think she and Harry know the plans that Charles has (streamlining BRF). And so baby steps have begun to place boundaries and set that in place.

      I hope your mother recovers soon from her stroke and regains her health fully.

    • portobadisco11 says:

      Sorry your mother is ill. However, if you want to criticise someone, then you have to prepare for a rebuttal. Why are you blaming Meghan for wanting to change the monarchy? What has she done to give you that idea? Most reports have said that Harry is the one wanting a private christening because he doesn’t want to subject himself to what he endured as a child. But your bias shows when it’s Meghan you’re blaming

      • Mego says:

        Exactly. There is another parent here but it’s assumed Meghan is calling the shots.

      • Olenna says:

        ITA, and this blaming Meghan instead of Harry seems to be the popular narrative for people who do not like her. To think that she could change anything about how the monarch manages the royal family’s public image is just naive and, in some cases, willfully ignorant.

      • Erinn says:

        “Sorry your mother is ill. However, if you want to criticise someone, then you have to prepare for a rebuttal”

        There’s rebuttal, and then there’s a lot of rudeness that gets thrown around on Meghan threads. I don’t blame OP for stating that she needs people to just be kind about it – she’s not asking everyone to agree with her.

        Beyond that – it’s a thread ABOUT Meghan, not Harry. Yes, Harry is also the parent and is equally responsible for any decisions being made. But there was SO much coverage about how Meghan was going to be the one to shake things up, or breathe fresh air into the royal family (this site and posters on this site were overjoyed with that idea and it was discussed OFTEN especially at first) so I don’t think the OP’s comments are coming out of left field.

      • Purplehazeforever says:

        Some on you are so predictable when anyone says something you don’t like about Meghan.
        There’s criticism & then there’s downright rudeness. There’s no need for it. That being said, this decision was probably made by both Harry & Meghan.

      • Seraphina says:

        @Erinn, I so agree. There are proper ways to discuss and debate. I’ve seen some very cruel and below the belt hits Thant make me cringe and think twice about posting sometimes. There is no reason to attack people. That said, I’ve seen some pretty belligerent statements made as well, BUT eloquence can bring those people down. And sadly, there are many that are just filled with negative energy.

      • LadyT says:

        Thank you Erinn. Well said. I have no strong feelings about Meghan whatsoever, but I strongly dislike all the coverage of her. It seems to bring out the very worst in people.

      • Blue Orange says:

        Meghan topics really do seem to bring out the worst in people. They’re so extreme and it really gets to me. It seems to have made the level of hatred in the Kate posts so much worse too. Meghan stans are quite something but not great with the logical and rational thinking.

        How about the idea that there are two people in this situation – Meghan & Harry. Some people say this is all Meghan, while others say it’s all Harry. Isn’t it quite likely that this is both of them? Maybe some of their reasons are good and some are bad? They make good choices and poor choices?

      • kerwood says:

        @Blue Orange, you claim that supporters of Meghan have issues with logic and rational thinking. How logical is it to accuse a woman who is married to a ‘minor royal’ of trying to change the entire Royal Family simply because she AND HER HUSBAND don’t want to pass around pictures of their newborn to all and sundry? Or dare to schedule their son’s christening, which is a private religious ceremony, to suit themselves?

        If Meghan and Harry are so minor and uninteresting that the world will soon tire of them, why not start the trend yourself? There has to be tons of interesting Kate and William stuff to discuss. Isn’t there?

      • Olenna says:

        @Kerwood, I’m getting the impression that some people might be a little disappointed that the usual tabloid lies and false narratives about Meghan never get a good foothold here. I do appreciate the novel idea, however, that two mature adults who love each and love their child may have made a decision (or two) about their child *together*, something people short on logic might not have considered./s

    • RuthyfromIt says:

      They are not trying to change the BRF and the Firm. It’s just they answer to the amount of abuse they are receiving in a daily basis from the British Press and even some relatives (William on Easter Day).
      I do believe that this new attitude it’s a Harry thing, she seems fine and prepared since day 1 for the negativity coming from some of the press. Meghan is more focused in doing her job. Harry is experiencing racism and classism for the first time, indirectly, and now is completely gone, he wants to play to a new game and it’s dragging the hole family in it.
      I do understand the privacy and the position of Archie as a future non-working royal due to 3 cousins who are going to do the job in less than 15years. We do not need to see him all the time, but giving minimal information like the godparents names or just few pictures through Instagram are better way to let the taxpayer enjoy the nice events (and forget the money they spent on clothing/renovations etc) and leave without giving the money shot that this abusers that we do have as press are searching.
      In a few year, they will run against Archie, his private life and friends. The more they close up and build walls, the more the press are going to crazier. I do hope they will find balance. And please, the Queen is not that “bright” or “intelligent” and she doesn’t like confrontation and discussion, she could talk with all the entourage and forced them to shout their mouth with all these fake gossip, instead senior royals assistant are talking every single day. The only house who is more controlled is Clarence House aka Charles and Camilla, but I do believe it’s because he wants to be see as cool father-in-law of the first black woman and clean a bit his image and past gaffes.

      • Britt says:

        This is not about the taxpayer that some have been lead to believe. This outrage is about the press and media being shut out and them not making money. Everytime the Sussexes post on their Instagram and copyright the photos, the press can’t make money. That is the issue. Harry and Meghan have been more giving and it reeks of entitlement from a spoiled press pack, who are stamping their feet because Harry and Meghan aren’t playing ball. The people will get photos, just no the arrivals. It’s not that big of an issue. They can give them the money shot but the press are going to want more eventually and that’s why they don’t have access because you give them an inch and they’ll continue to take advantage and blackmail.

      • Blue Orange says:

        @Britt – consider a world where we get rid of the press. Celebs, the rich, famous, entitled & royals all get to control their own coverage though social media and authorised coverage. What could possibly go wrong?

    • HK9 says:

      How does she want to change the Royal Family? Nothing she’s done has really been out of the ordinary **shrugs**

    • ProfPlum says:

      Wishing your mom a speedy recovery. But why do you assume these decisions are Meghan’s alone? I’m sure Harry, who saw his mother harassed by the press and had endured his own intrusive press coverage, has some thoughts on the matter. The fact of the matter is that she can’t win. If the christening was public, she’d be accused of being an attention-whore. If it’s low-key and private, she’s biting the hand that feeds.

    • Salvation says:

      @Jessica, sorry yr mom is I’ll. I had to LOL at yr “I respected Meghan before but”….followed by biased criticism based on nothing but rumors and innuendo. What exactly makes you believe Meghan wants to change the BRF? And why exactly do you believe all these decisions being made are made by Meghan only and no one else? The hate and stereotyping of this biracial woman is just absurd.

      • Ash says:

        Good lord. I’ve been silent enough. What is with you people?! Do you know her? What is with this unapologetic, blind faith in Meghan? Heaven forbid someone say something remotely questioning her and even apologizing before saying it and y’all jump down her throat! It literally is not always about race! My goodness. The blind faith in Meghan on this site is utterly ridiculous. Ugh!
        Prayers for your mom. My mom is recovering from surgery, I feel your emotions!

      • Olenna says:

        @Ash, please tell us what these “you people”, as you call them, are suppose to believe and not apologize for. I’m sure you or someone like-minded that you know has a list of grievances about Meghan that you believe are valid and not based on hate, prejudice or envy. Oh, and if you’re not British, doesn’t include tax-payer entitlement to the Sussexes private lives.

      • LadyT says:

        Good comment Ash. Olenna’s caustic reply underlines your point, which went right over her head.

      • Olenna says:

        @Lady T, no it didn’t and if asking someone to explain their reason(s) for criticizing a group of commenters is “caustic” because they can/will defend their positions on the negativity towards the Sussexes and the one criticizing can’t or won’t, then so be it.

    • Himmiefan says:

      But you need to give specific examples oh how you think Meghan is trying to change the Royal Family.

      • sammiches says:

        No, she doesn’t.

      • Maria says:

        sammiches- oh ok, I guess we’ll just take her word for it….?

        Examples are helpful if you are arguing a point.

      • sammiches says:

        She’s not “arguing a point”, she made a comment based on her opinion. Ya’ll are the ones arguing with her.

    • A says:

      I’m not trying to be hard on you, I promise, but I feel like it might be worthwhile for you to maybe re-examine the words you’ve chosen here. Specifically the stuff about how Meghan is labouring under the “delusion” that she can “change” the royal family. The bit about how you “admired her so much more” when she was an actress is especially telling. It’s an interesting example of how some really egregious concern trolling gets cloaked under language that’s intended to be innocuous, but isn’t.

      But of course, you’re only thinking about what’s “best” for Meghan, I’m sure. Am I right? (;

    • nic919 says:

      Only the Cambridges had cameras film the arrivals at their christenings but no one else did this. So wouldn’t it be more fair to say that the Cambridges are the ones who changed things and that Harry and Meghan are doing what all the other members of the royal family did with respect to christenings? Why is Meghan getting blamed for trying to change the royal family when she and Harry are in fact doing things far more like Edward (not using HRH) or the other children of the Queen.

      There are so many people who take what William and Kate have done and act like its what the entire royal family has been doing, showing that they are completely unaware of “protocol” or other traditions that Harry and Meghan are supposed to have violated.

      • kerwood says:

        @nic919 But Keen Katie has never put a foot wrong, so filming the christening of her and Normal Bill’s child couldn’t possibly have been an attention grabbing move. It was in keeping with thousands of years of ye olde British tradition.

  6. Eliza says:

    Like the birth certificate, the baptismal certificate is public record in the CoE, and will eventually be public. I get the want of privacy, but considering they can’t block it legally, it’s just delaying the information. It’s a weird thing to stand on.

    • A random commenter says:

      If it’s going to become public information regardless, I think it’s a bit silly to go through the motions of making this announcement. Perhaps they have means for keeping the register secret?

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, that’s what I said above. Per Richard Palmer (who hates Meghan but this time he was critical of the queen as well), the royal family records their baptismal records in a different register than “normal” people and thus it does not have to be public information.

      • Britt says:

        No it won’t be public. This is under a royal peculiar and in the Queen’s private chapel. That’s under her jurisdiction and that’s another reason the press are pissed because the Sussexes aren’t that stupid.

      • Kittycat says:

        The church they will use does release it.

        God what a stupid conversation.

      • Lady D says:

        “If it’s going to become public information regardless,” The press also knew it was going to be public too, but that didn’t stop them from trying to stir up shit and hatred. It’s funny to see the RR’s so mad. I’m loving it.

    • Toot says:

      No it won’t be public. Because it’s happening in the private chapel of the Queen it doesn’t have to be released to the public.

      • Olenna says:

        Yeah, I read there are exceptions made for TQ’s private chapels (as Britt noted above: Royal peculiar).

      • Tourmaline says:

        Richard Palmer has tweeted today that that is not the case and the royals have been “flouting” the law for years by not registering christenings in the usual manner. In fact he is frankly saying that M and H are in breach of the laws concerning the Church of England if they don’t name the names. Some of the royal reporters are really gunning for the godparents names to the extent perhaps of mounting a legal challenge. Crazy.

      • Salvation says:

        LOL, I can’t wait for this lawsuit to be filed; this is just hilarious. People pulling their hairs out over some minor royals who are irrelevant and will never be king/queen consort and their child who will be a nobody compared to the precious Cambridge kids, SMH

  7. Britt says:

    Good for her for cheering Serena because no matter what she does, someone will always be angry and complain. Meghan and Harry don’t need the press and are taking control and that’s a hard pill to swallow for a spoiled, entitled, blackmailing press to handle. They’re drawing a line with their son and good for them. I wish those reporters will stop trying to use the “public” as a tactic because anyone with sense knows that this is the press desperate to make money off of Archie.

  8. Skylark says:

    I concur entirely re the choice and reason behind keeping the godparents’ names private and said as much elsewhere. It’s to protect them and ensure that they don’t become just another target for the nasty elements of the media.

    • Poppy says:

      Ok they want to keep it private, then why make an announcement at all? Why announce details of the date, where it will take place and the name of the archbishop? Why not just have the christening and post a few pictures on the instagram page.

      • Britt says:

        Eventually, I think they’ll start doing what Beyoncé does and do surprise drops/releases of information and pictures and avoid the media all together. They have the clout and interest to do it that way anyway.

      • Maria says:

        Exactly!

      • Salvation says:

        @Poppy, the British media and the RRs already put it out there before the Sussexes said anything. The media reported all the details, the date, the venue and the name of the archbishop. If you want to blame, then go after the British media and the palace snitches.

      • Lady D says:

        They made an announcement because if they hadn’t the information would have leaked anyway, and they would be called aallllllll kinds of names like sneaky and disrespectful for not making that information public. There was no way to keep this upcoming ceremony quiet.

      • A says:

        Because releasing the names of their godparents, a number of whom might be private citizens unused to the level of scrutiny from the press that comes with being associated w/ Meghan and Harry, is a pole apart from releasing generic details of the christening. One could potentially lead to harmful consequences for individual human beings as a result of press intrusion, while the other couldn’t. It’s well beyond just common concerns of privacy, lol.

  9. BaronSamedi says:

    She looks so good! And I will fully admit to being suuper biased since I pretty much wore the exact same outfit yesterday 🙂 I even own that hat! (granted, my stuff is from H&M and Zara but still…)

    I think the outfit is perfectly fine. The blazer, pumps and hat elevate the look considerably and her jeans are slim fit not jeggings so absolutely appropiate for watching a sporting event.

    • Penguin says:

      She’s very much off duty, not in the royal box and hanging with her friends, this isn’t an offficial occasion, jeans is fine, even jeggings if she had wanted

  10. Boxy Lady says:

    Based on all the negativity thrown at the Sussexes, I can’t blame them for keeping the godparents a secret. And from the wording of the official announcement, it could be interpreted as the godparents themselves wanting to be secret instead of the Sussexes making that decision for them.

    • Lady D says:

      Yes, the announcement made it sound like it was the godparent’s requesting the anonymity.

      • Tourmaline says:

        When I saw the picture of Genevieve Hillis at Wimbledon I remembered that there was already a bit of press about her when she was a royal wedding guest, mentioning she was a major Republican party fundraiser. For instance, for ex Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/politics/scott-walker-campaign-fundraising-strategy/index.html

        It’s been rumored that many of the godparents are parents of kids that were attendants in the Sussex royal wedding (like Mark Dyer), reportedly Jessica Mulroney is not going to be a godparent due to her religion (Jewish).

      • Salvation says:

        @Tourmaline post is a perfect example why the Sussexes and Archie’s godparents are choosing everyone to remain anonymous, who needs the scrutiny and having every aspect of yr business snooped into by strangers just to prove a point? Before Genevieve Hillis appeared at Wimbledon with duchess Meghan, I had no idea who she is nor did I know/care what her political affiliations are. Now a day later post Wimbledon, we know who she campaigned for etc, like….c’mon, who needs this?..
        No wonder they don’t want their names out there, it’s too dangerous.

      • Tourmaline says:

        Truly though, for the two friends at Wimbledon, the names are already out there as “Meghan’s friends” from the time around the wedding, plus now appearing at Wimbledon. But yes I can see there could be other potential godparents that perhaps have not even been in the public eye even to that small extent.

    • Moose says:

      Yes I agree that is how it is worded – the godparents themselves want to remain anonymous to avoid press intrusion into their own private lives, why on earth would anyone wish that on their friends? I don’t blame them at all either, the press don’t care about anyone trying to go about their normal everyday lives, they just want to harass to get salacious gossip!

  11. Annie... says:

    I am glad she could be there to support her friend!! And that she could be there with other friends too.
    The necklace is too cute ❤

    (also, remember 2015? And last year? When Kate was criticized here for going to Wimbledon during her maternity leave? Good ol’ times)

    • G. says:

      Yeah commenters here kept going and going about how she could have gone back to work already if she was okay with leaving the baby and sparing some time for Wimbledon. Good ol’ times indeed.

    • bonobochick says:

      I don’t remember. Want to share the links so everyone can re-live the past?

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The only people who want Meghan back at work are the Royal Reporters so they will have something new to write and/or harp about each day. Bill & Cathy Cambridge do not want Meghan back to work because it will require them to up there game and work three days a week. Rose who? LOL!

      • Vv says:

        @baytampabay I doubt Harry and Meghan have ever “worked” 3 days a week this past year,excluding tours.. Harry’s numbers would have been higher.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Just threw a number out there. I am sure you get my drift about Bill and Cathy upping their game which was my point.

    • Becks1 says:

      I just checked. For 2015 there really wasn’t a lot of criticism, but last year was the first time there was such an emphasis on maternity leave and how Kate could NOT be expected to leave her children. I think that was the root of a lot of the criticism. Not that Kate shouldn’t enjoy herself on maternity leave, but that there had been this outcry for months that Kate “could not” be expected to do anything because SHE JUST HAD A BABY. I always found that laughable because many women on maternity leave do leave their babies for periods of time.

      ETA okay wait in 2015 there was criticism, but it was more for her lack of work in general, nothing about maternity leave, which I think is pretty par for the course.

  12. Toot says:

    I loved these pics! Meghan is totally unbothered and happy, while the hateful press continues their mess.

    Also, I said on here weeks ago that I hope M&H keep the godparents names private and just release the pics of the family, so thrilled about that too.

  13. Cidy says:

    I really dont think that Meghan planned to come after Kate, I think she just went to the match she wanted to go to. There is this weird like media thing where everyone thinks that all the royals (mostly meg and kate) are trying to outsmart each other and I really, really dont think they care that much. But I dont know, its possible.

    I liked the casual look, she looks good in the white jacket, which I dont normally like. The only thing I dont like is the hat?? But I hate most hats.

    I dont get the whole godparents situation or why it’s a big deal, I’m not that invested in the royal family lol. It seems though, like every move they make is tedious. It just sounds exhausting.

    • Harla says:

      Hi Cidy, oh my goodness such a sensible comment!! I agree that Meghan went to the match she wanted to go to and didn’t sit at the dining table with a calendar plotting which day to “draft” Kate.

  14. Sofia says:

    I absolutely really do love this look.

    And considering the amount of hate comments I’ve heard that are being thrown around her friends, I really don’t blame them for wanting to keep the godparents private. Do you really want the DM to stalk you until they find a picture of you at 18 drinking and then write articles upon articles about how you’re a bad influence on baby Archie? Yeah didn’t think so either

    And no I don’t believe they’ll become public. The whole register thing is only for public chapels. Not private ones like the one Archie is being christened at.

  15. Lyn says:

    It’s so obvious they intend to keep a strict control over the privacy of their kid and even non celebrity friends who dont want to deal with the insanity of the British press.
    But they do understand that some people do want some glimpses of their son or them in general, so they post pics and vids on occasions. They are just not going through the press or given them non-copyright pics.

    In life you cant constantly harass, vilify and abuse someone and expect them to be open to you or give you access to their life and child. The same child the press didnt give a shit about when they were harassing the mother. They have withdrawn.

    Btw the last few months have debunked some narratives which this same media set up – Meghan is obsessed with titles, she wants all of it for her children, she loves the spotlight, she has no friends etc.

    The media should have treated her better or at least with some humanity, and maybe she could have reciprocated. But they were hell bent on humiliating her for everything real or imagined. And here we are. It is what is now.

    • Eliza says:

      They honestly would be better to cut off all press about Archie. The half announcements are not helping. Zara didn’t announce the day, church etc of her kids baptism and there’s only tiny blurry pictures of them walking out of church.

      Announcing the date, place, priest then saying its private, but we will post pictures is confusing. Especially after the we will tell you when she’s in labor after the babies born, but not where, and only a pool winner will get photos, except for the additional one we choice at our discretion.

      If he’s untitled (well, until Charles’ reign) and private, keep him as such. There would be more out pour of hate initially but people would expect to not see the baby due to consistency. But they’d have to not post him on their public work-related Instagram as well.

      • Peg says:

        You’re running in circles, bottom line it’s their child, their choice when and how to post his pictures.
        Zara is not a working Royal, Harry is.

      • Britt says:

        I don’t think it matters what they do because they are clearly held to a higher standard than the rest. If they did what Kate and William did with the press and public outside the chapel, then it would too “Hollywood celebrity”, one of their favorite criticisms of Meghan. I’m sorry but at this point, you can’t live your life by a press and media that is entitled and will find fault with anything. People are treating this like it’s a huge controversy because they don’t want their son in the public eye. Harry and Meghan have control over their child and aren’t playing media games. I don’t see the issue with releasing pictures after the event anyway, it’s not like those pack of hyena newspapers won’t put them on the cover. Royal fans were happy with his birth and the interview, they’ll be fine with the christening.

      • Linda says:

        @Eliza
        Agreed. It’s either they want complete privacy or they do not.

      • Lady D says:

        They are not asking for complete privacy. They have never said that. They are asking that their child be treated as a private citizen. (because he is)

      • Vv says:

        @Eliza I kind of agree. It’s like when they didn’t confirm where Archie was born days after he was born. Tabloids were going wild running headlines,and they knew that the birth certificate would have gone public in a few days. All that secrecy around it looked nonsensical.
        They’re maximizing the attention,and I can’t believe they don’t realize it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They weren’t maximizing attention around their son’s birth. They stated they would keep it private and they did. The press went after the hospitals, harassing the staff, harassing possible doctors. They never did release the information. The press paid to get a copy of the birth certificate, which they would have to do for any other private citizen.

        As written above, the RRs are mad because Harry and Meghan are not allowing them to monetize their child. They aren’t bitching about no access simply for lack of access. The RRs are bitching because they cannot make money off this child.

      • Vv says:

        @notasugarhere “They never did release the information. The press paid to get a copy of the birth certificate”
        And? This is the point. They knew that the certificate would have been public in any case. Confirming where she gave birth,even after a couple of days,would have not changed anything. It would have actually decreased the attention,because the press tends to feel emboldened by the requests of privacy. Tabloids are running right now more pieces about the christening,the “privacy”,the potential godparents, including the friends she brought at Wimbledon,than I believe they would,if they had released the details a couple of days ago.

  16. Lisa says:

    I do not blame them for keeping the godparents private. Just from the appearance yesterday there were articles doing a deep dive into the two women Meghan was pictured with at Wimbledon. I can see why Meghan and Harry would want to try and avoid that for the people who are officially going to be Archie’s godpatents.

  17. Citresse says:

    At least her jeans weren’t the distressed rip look and she didn’t wear an untucked shirt. I seem to remember that look from Toronto…..anyway, it also looks like she had her hair straightened, which leads me to wonder: if MM had given birth to a girl, would she be straightening her hair????? Aren’t those chemicals harmful to infants and young children?
    MM really should have worn something dressier. Or wait, this is MM’s private time (before the private Christening) with tax-funded security, tax-funded transportation, tax-funded lunch with tax-funded wine, then returns home to her tax-funded renovated mansion.

    • Hermione says:

      Feel better now after all your snarky comments? Haters just gotta be haters.

      • Citresse says:

        I think I should be able to respond to an accusation of hatred. It has nothing to do with hatred. These people: the Cambridges and Sussexes are the worst layabouts. They use and continue to seriously abuse taxpayers.

      • Lady D says:

        Which has what to do with Meghan damaging her hypothetical daughter’s self esteem?

      • Mignionette says:

        @Citresse – so because they are publicly funded we are allowed to opine on what she does with her hair.
        Also why are you commenting on whether she chooses to chemically alter it? I also bc its a familiar criticism often thrown at black women. As if white women also don’t dye, straighten their hair and wear extensions….. *rolls eyes*

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Citresse, There is nothing wrong with your comment as it is just your personal opinion and you have a right to state it. I do not agree with all you said but you do make some valid points.

    • ByTheSea says:

      So, let me get this straight: you’re complaining about an outfit she wore before she and Harry were even engaged, to an event that wasn’t a royal engagement? You’re also complaining about her straightening her hair and the effect it would have (health-wise and psychologically) on her hypothetical female child?? You’ve lost the plot, honey. Try again.

      • Citresse says:

        I’m just resigned to the fact the younger generations don’t, for the most part, put as much effort into their appearance when they leave their home.

      • Lady D says:

        Sure you are.

      • ByTheSea says:

        @Citresse – In reality, she seems to put a lot of effort into her appearance. In fact, so much so, that you’re actually complaining that she straightens her hair (a step she doesn’t need to take). The fact is that you would complain about her no matter what, so one has to wonder why…

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I think Diana set this dangerous trap for future BRF women. Every time Diana set out of her home she was ready and prepared for the cover of Vogue.

        What is and is not featured on the cover of Vogue has changed much in the last 25 years. Some of us older posters may not like it but we must just keep calm, carry on and move with the times! LOL!

      • Katherine says:

        Wtf? Diana was regularly photographed in jeans. Or her gym attire. And I think would have worn an outfit very similar to Meghan’s if she were alive today and my bet is would have been widely praised for being so trendsetting. This thread is another level delusional.

    • Peg says:

      Why not take it up with the Government about what is harmful to children.
      Check instagram for photos on Sunday, is that tax-funded also? just checking.
      Pity the Sussexes don’t have to move their tennis court a few feet.
      Is ‘ tax funded’ the new buzz word, I’m going to run down to 10 Downing Street, to complain about those darn Royals, living in their free Palaces, getting free security, eating free food, free transportation, taking abuse and having to smile through it.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I have my hair colored every six weeks. If Meghan wants to use chemicals on her hair it is her business.

      • Citresse says:

        I’m not complaining about MM straightening her hair. I’ve seen photos of her younger days- she looks better with it chemically treated….though on the day of her engagement to Harry, I thought it looked too long and a bit straggly.

    • Hotsauceinmybag says:

      Buzz off

    • bonobochick says:

      What does her hair have to do with anything? So now folks want to police Duchess Meghan’s hair choices and that of her mythical daughter? 🥴

      Just call Duchess Meghan the N word and keep it moving cause the misogynoir is obvious and all over the place.

    • MsIam says:

      @Citresse if she had worn a “dressier” outfit, then she would have been accused of trying to upstage/outdo Kate. Of wanting to be the center of attention, etc. And of course the cost of how much she was wearing would be documented to make the “spends too much!” crowd happy. Meghan is dressed like someone going to a sporting event, which is what she was doing. And for your comment on the “tax-payer paid security, etc.” that is true for all of the working royals. Do you want them to not leave the house? If you want the royal family abolished or not supported by taxpayers, shouldn’t you be writing your legislative representatives about that?

      • ByTheSea says:

        It’s straight nuts that no matter what she does, it’s picked apart and complained about.

    • Himmiefan says:

      I’m totally lost. Hypothetical girl child and straightening hair? Someone help me out here.

    • Lurkmode says:

      There are other ways for women with African textured hair to straighten their hair that don’t involve chemicals. But nice try on trying to claim Meghan is a bad mother for straightening her hair.

    • Jaded says:

      @Citresse: For the love of Pete why are you ragging on an outfit she wore at a casual sporting event BEFORE she was engaged to Harry? And how do you know she’s using chemical straighteners on her hair? It’s like you’re actively creating all these negative scenarios to slag her. May I enlighten you on natural, chemical-free hair straighteners? My niece who is half African-American swears by them:

      Mix one cup of whole milk or coconut milk with one tbsp of honey and let it soak into your scalp and hair one hour before washing. It will help soften your hair and make it easier to use styling tools. You can also add one egg to the mixture and leave it in your hair with a plastic cap on for 30 minutes before rinsing out. Be sure to use cool water so you don’t cook the egg in your hair. Another recipe advises using a straightening mask twice a week for two months to relax your hair naturally. Mix 1 cup coconut milk, 2 tbsp olive oil, 5-6 tbsp lemon juice, 3 tbsp cornstarch. Combine at a warm to low temperature and stir until thoroughly mixed. Chill, and then apply to hair, leave in for 30 minutes, then rinse.

      • Citresse says:

        Jaded, thanks for that information, I have naturally curly hair, and in this Toronto humidity, well, you can imagine.
        I saw photos of Cambridges arriving for Christening….William wearing dark sunglasses; it adds to the intrigue.
        I look forward to the CB coverage on Monday.
        And to repeat, there are certain aspects, I do agree, such as keeping the list of godparents private. The public have no right to know that information.

    • kerwood says:

      Now where are all the people who claim that Meghan fans are crazy?

      • bonobochick says:

        @kerwood They are still busy policing people’s tones / words and chastising those who like Duchess Meghan while also trying to dissuade some from liking her by making OTT comments that her fans think she is perfect & above reproach.

  18. Mego says:

    So so tired of the “we paid for renos on your home so we are entitled to know every detail of your life” refrain in the press and beyond.

    We paid for the renos on your home so we expect you to do charity work and engagements – do your royal work. I have no issue with that. But the public wanting to know every detail of their life is creepy. I don’t need to know who the god parents will be but of course I’m not looking to write an a hit piece about how so and so was SNUBBED. I don’t want or need to see pictures of their infant either but I don’t care about the child’s skin colour like the racists do.

    Anyway It was great to see a few pics of Meg looking relaxed and lovely at Wimbledon. I hope she enjoyed her day with friends and am glad she didn’t try for another awkward photo op outing with the DOC.

    • Mignionette says:

      The ‘we paid for your home so are entitled to see your cervix when you’re giving birth and have first dibs on your first born son’ line is exceptionally distasteful.

      As a Brit I can attest to the fact that most people do not give a s**t. It’s the RR’s who are trying to make the outrage happen, with very little success. For them, the end game is to redefine the limits of Archie as an untitled private citizen. They know that his private citizen status is going to continue to be a limiting factor for their earning potential where Archie is concerned, especially given the privacy laws in the UK surrounding minors, so they are setting about chipping away at that status now. They are trying to chip away at the line or at the very least blur it into their murky cesspit of a world.

      I am glad that Harry and Meghan are not budging on this issue. Granted his father and mother are a Prince and Duchess, and technically Archie will be a Prince on Chuck’s accession to the throne. However right now Archie is an infant already growing up in a Goldfish bowl, so if his parents wish to protect him and TQ herself is ok with that then the RR’s need to fall back.

      If I had one criticism, it would be to say that they should not feature him on @SussexRoyal IG, but rather periodically release copyrighted photos of him to the press as and when they feel comfortable. That way there is no comeback that he is part of the SR brand.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “then the RR’s need to fall back.”

        No, the Royal Reporters need to F!*K-OFF.

        Yes, I am talking directly to you Piers Morgan and Ingrid Stewart or whatever her name is!

      • N says:

        Every word of this. I agree. Thank you for such a stable and eloquent, non vicious comment.

  19. Peg says:

    The British Media is foaming at their mouths.
    Penny Junor is demanding that they show Archie for the cost of Frogmore Cottage repairs.
    Arthur Edwards is demanding Harry treat the press corps to drinks and explain his treatment of the press.
    They are claiming the Sussexes screwed up the birth announcement, LOL.
    Meghan and Harry said they wanted a private birth, BP said they would announce when Meghan went into labor.
    Meghan went into labor, maybe Harry forgot to tell BP, Archie was delivered and announced it eight hours later. I don’t see a screw up.

    • Britt says:

      The press are used to blackmailing the royals into giving access to them and with Harry and Meghan, it’s not happening. I mean, the slander, weaponising her family, the racism and sexism, the Frogmore nonsense. Nothing is working and they’re getting more and more frustrated. Not to mention Newspaper have been on a decline and social media is the current news Mecca. All I see is desperation and fear of the unknown because they don’t and can’t control Harry and Meghan.

      • Melissa says:

        You are 100% correct. The press can feel their power is in a decline, so they are panicking. I remember several reporters getting angry with the Cambridges for not giving them access to Prince George when he was a baby. One reporter tweeted that he would have to write negative stories if the Cambridges didn’t give the press more info. It’s all about trying to blackmail the Sussexes. I don’t think they understand that Harry and Meghan are two very headstrong and resilient people.

    • notasugarhere says:

      BP alerted the press as they said they would. Standard practice is not to announce midnight to 6 or 8am, and not to announced until after the Queen has been informed. They weren’t going to wake the Queen up at midnight to tell her, so the announcement was made in the morning after she was told. All standard but don’t tell the upset RRs.

      • Peg says:

        Archie was born 6ish and the press was notified at 2pm , an 8 hour delay.

      • notasugarhere says:

        You might be looking at adjusted timeline and not understanding. He was born at 5:26am, RoyalFamily and Royal.Uk official accounts announced the birth at 6:47am. Nothing wrong with that timeline, nor with the timeline for announcing her labour because of waiting until standard PR hours. OMG, the RRs had to wait a whole hour before finding out he’d been born? Oh the horror.

  20. Sam says:

    I read all royal christenings are private, no press, only pictures released of the event after. It only changed when the Cambridges allowed press to capture arrivals and depatures or when the public were allowed to see them for Charlotte christening otherwise its all completely private according to reports.

    Harry is a working royal and they have announced Zaras children births even though that was private so why wouldnt they announce Harry’s son christening?
    If they hadnt announced it,people would still have complained either ways.

  21. Millenial says:

    I agree with others that it’s a weird hill to die on, but whatever, I’m sure they have a good reason (as others have noted the insane interest would be enough for their friends to ask for privacy).

    The taxpayer arguments are super odd to me. I don’t get how paying taxes = the right to be nosy about every little detail.

  22. Citresse says:

    As others have stated, if these royals have an ongoing, truly desperate need for increased privacy, then leave the royal family, stop abusing taxpayers and make your own way in the world.
    No one forced MM to marry a Prince. She knew and knows the trade-off.

    • Britt says:

      As usual, you single out Meghan as if she’s making all the decisions. You can still be a royal without the incessant media intrusion. They are not required to share every aspect of their personal lives all because you pays taxes. The only thing they asked privacy for was for Archie. I don’t think that’s too much to ask. The demands to see him like he’s some zoo animal is disturbing to say the least. They release a full picture of him and because Harry and Meghan are huge, their will be demands for more.

      • Maria says:

        I understand that they want privacy for Archie. Why make all these announcements then? All royal christenings are private in the BRF, then don’t make an announcement period. You don’t want to disclose the names of the godparents, fine, then kerp quiet about it. Instead we a get a steady drip, drip, drip of announcements that inform us that they are not going announce anything. It’s like they want to rub our noses in it.

      • Melissa says:

        Buckingham Palace released a short statement because the reporters kept hounding them for info. No one knew when Archie’s christening would be until the media started trying to guess dates. One paper said it was going to be on July 4th. Same thing with the birth announcement. The Palace has to respond to certain media inquiries. Will and Kate announced the christenings of their children weeks in advance. Archie’s christening wasn’t verified until this week because Harry and Meghan probably never wanted the info to get out, but had to because of snooping reporters.

      • Lady D says:

        Snooping reporters and disloyal palace staff out to make a buck.

      • LindaM says:

        Excellent points Melissa. Also, the “announcement” was a media advisory, that the media shared with the public.

    • A says:

      Having to put up with absolutely horrendous behaviour from an industry that makes money off of your existence, often by printing outright lies and conjecture, is not a trade off for existing in the public eye. Having to put up with poor behaviour is not a part of any social contract. The people who say as much are people who have something to gain from behaving poorly towards other human beings. They want to be able to justify their sh-tty behaviour, so they invent excuses for it.

    • Jaded says:

      I think Harry and Meghan are doing a fine balancing act of allowing access UNDER THEIR OWN TERMS. There is no obligation on their part to parade their private lives in front of the media, they will simply continue to do their good works, allow a certain amount of media access but the line in the sand has been drawn about their personal life and especially that of their baby.

      BTW, you can’t just quit the royal family like you can any other job and it appears they both take their responsibilities seriously. If Harry and Meghan decide that he would prefer to step out of the line of succession I’m sure the gutter press and RRs would froth at the mouth that he’s lazy, irresponsible and not doing the job he was born to do.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They would harass Harry, Meghan, and their children every day for the rest of their lives. All without the protection via BP if they left the fold.

  23. Beli says:

    I’td they did every single thing the press are demanding of them, they would be accused of not knowing their place.

    At least more people seem to be calling the toxicity out now.

  24. TheOriginalMia says:

    The British public did not purchase Meghan, her womb, her kid or her privacy when she married Harry. The press and public will see pictures of Archie and his immediate family shortly after the ceremony. Other than not revealing the names of the people enshrined with Archie’s spiritual guidance, what’s different about this christening compared to the other non-royal grandkids? And before the Zara didn’t announce the christening answer, she isn’t a working royal. Harry & Meghan are. This event may appear in the CC, like it has for the Cambridges.

    Meghan looked good at Wimbledon. She and her friends had a great time. Glad she was able to have a small break before this weekend’s events.

  25. Amne says:

    That hat and jacket are way too small-the jacket in particular. Shots from the back show it straining, and the shoulders actually ride up on her. I’m sorry to say, but Meghan got her look spectacularly wrong here.

    • Gingerbee says:

      She still has some baby weight, so obviously the jacket is a little snug. There is nothing wrong with that.

    • Salvation says:

      And if she bought a whole new outfit, she’d still be criticized for spending so much money on a new outfit instead of wearing old ones while she loosing her pregnancy weight. Gal can’t win in the eyes of some.

    • Lady D says:

      Spectacularly wrong? We clearly have different definitions for that word.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I looked at the earlier photos of her wearing that & it did the same thing; it pulls at the sleeves & looks very uncomfortable. It looks like the kind of thing that looks good in the dressing room mirror standing still, but once you start actually living in it, you notice things–it pulls at the arms & etc.

    • Jaded says:

      “Spectacularly wrong”? Good Lord she’s not wearing a tube top and baseball cap. She’s got big nursing mother boobs and that’s what is causing the jacket to hitch a bit. Honestly, the jacket hyperbole is ridiculous.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She looks fine, and isn’t this her blazer from Serena’s collection?

  26. Myra says:

    RR and the British Media should stop demanding everything. They have overplayed their hand with the negative press. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence now see that the British Media NEVER did their homework on Meghan. Ever since they moved from KP and took control of their PR all of the Media’s stories have been debunked! Case in point: Meghan at Wimbledon with 2 women she has known for over 20 years. Yet the media has stated for 2 years that she had no friends!

  27. Mego says:

    This crap is headline news on CNN. Unbelievable. Just cuz they are keeping their child’s baptism private. The world is nuts.

    • Abby says:

      Yeah I saw that. The entitlement to think that paying for renovations on a historic property means automatic access to all private moments is mind-boggling.

      I made the mistake of reading comments on royal social media accounts photos of the christening. It is amazing how much people hate Meghan and adore Kate.

      I feel like the decisions Harry and Meghan are making for their family are reported by the media as MEGHAN FLOUTING PROTOCOL. nonstop. Like… she is not making these decisions unilaterally. It’s Harry’s family… but not one person criticizes Harry. Only Meghan.

  28. Gem says:

    I love the components of her outfit, but find the jacket to be ill-fitting through the shoulders and upper arms. The jacket is a repeat, so it could just be a bit of baby weight. She looks rested and healthy.

    The decision to straighten or not straighten her hair is a personal one.

    • TeamAwesome says:

      The blazer is a repeat from the Australia tour, so still kind of early in the pregnancy. I didn’t think it fit very well then either.

  29. aquarius64 says:

    The press wants to get dirt on the godparents to help sell papers. But the media is upset the Markles are not invited. The tabloids wrote a story that Meghan doesn’t want Dad Jr and Sam near the baby (big surprise) and she turns to Charles for support. That was three days ago and no response from Bad Dad or TOD. The press wasted money on the Markles and they got nothing for its investment.

  30. Here In My Jammies says:

    If men have to wear suits then Meghan can wear slacks like the time she went to Wimbledon with Kate.

    Plus, I’ve been critical of Kate’s jeggings at events where they seemed underdressed so I should be consistent.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      If men are required to wear suits then, I must agree that jeans are not appropriate or the best choice.

    • notasugarhere says:

      There is no dress code for spectators at Wimbledon, unless you’re in the Royal Box which she isn’t.

    • LindaM says:

      That dress code is for the royal box and center court, Meghan was not seated in either.

  31. Ref7 says:

    Please. Nobody’s eyebrows were raised by jeans.

    • Citresse says:

      Older members of the aristocracy didn’t like it.
      Look at Carole and Mike Middleton. They know how to dress.

      • Sofia says:

        Well lucky for Meghan she’s not at an a formal event nor is she sitting in the royal box so she can wear what she wants.

      • BeanieBean says:

        In a recent interview, Carole said she doesn’t like to wear jeans any more because her waist has gotten bigger; dresses are more comfortable for her. There’s nothing wrong with jeans.

      • MsIam says:

        The Middletons are not aristocrats, lol. And the “older members” probably don’t like a lot of stuff, who cares!

      • Citresse says:

        Yes, I know Carole and Mike Middleton are not aristocrats.
        Whenever I see photos of Carole and Mike they always look great…..especially Mike. Mike Middleton is a debonair fellow, a titan of style.

      • kerwood says:

        The Thirsty Middletons are not even REMOTELY members of the aristocracy. Unless being the WHITE social climbing parents of Kate Middleton make them aristocratic.

    • Maria says:

      I think the jeans and blazer combination is classy. Especially with the heels. I hope she keeps some of this extra weight on because she looks great. Hope she doesn’t go all skinny like Kate.

  32. Shannon says:

    I love this pic! Meg looks great, her friends look great, just three girlfriends having fun. I also love the idea of Kate and Meg coordinating their Wimbledon outings to shut the haters up. I mean, I have no idea if that’s what happened, I just like to think it. I’m in a place in my life where I appreciate female energy and bonding more than I used to, lol

  33. Zazu says:

    I would definitely wear this look! She looks great. My feeling is that Harry and Meghan have decided to lead very active public lives on the Royal job front, with their patronages and public appearances, but draw a hard boundary around Archie and their private family life. They will have lots of photo ops and tours and public work events but they want Archie to be treated much more like Zara’s children.
    I find it weird that some of the Brits think the social contract is “we give you this fancy Royal life and in return demand access to every part of your personal life.” Isn’t the social contract that the adults work full-time celebrating civil society and attending state events and in return get to be Royals?
    Archie is a minor and not a working royal, hence his childhood should be private. It’s slightly different with Prince George but except at official functions (trooping of the colors balcony, royal tours, etc.) access to every other part of his life is at his parents’ discretion. It’s nice when they share pictures of birthday portraits or something but it’s not a “right” of the people!

    • Lurkmode says:

      I don’t think it’s the Brits that are foaming at the mouth. It’s the Royal Reporters and middle aged American women that are foaming at the mouth. The average person (Briton or American) doesn’t care.

      • LindaM says:

        Hope you’re right Lurkmode. I find it very disturbing that some people think they somehow have a right to know details about anyone life. The RRs and tabloids are deplorable.

      • kerwood says:

        Ding!ding!ding! There is no doubt in my mind that 95% of the people who complain about how much Harry and Meghan cost the British taxpayer have never got any closer to Great Britain than a boxed sit of Downton Abbey episodes. They think they’re experts on the Royal family because they spend most of their time commenting about them on the Daily Mail website.

        These women can’t get over the fact that Harry married a BLACK woman because a lot of them think Harry should have married THEM.

        Most REAL British people REALLY DON’T CARE that much.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @kerwood, Well said!

  34. Lainey F. says:

    Love the photos, Kaiser. I’m a longtime lurker, this is my favorite spot for Sussex appreciation, piping hot tea and some epic shade.

    She looks serene and unbothered. To paraphrase Tywin Lannister, “the lion does not concern itself with the opinion of the sheep.” I’d love to see some pics of the fashion and hair police. I suspect their outer beauty matches what is presumably their inner beauty.

    • kerwood says:

      Very well said. Meghan doesn’t need to worry about what the sad cases at the Daily Mail (and other places) think about her. She’s got her man, she’s got her baby and she’s got a great life.

  35. blunt talker says:

    I agree with most posters about the press in the UK especially the tabs are angry because they can’t make money off of the Sussexes. Harry truly hates the press more so than Meghan. If he says there will no photogs hanging around Archie’s christening that is the way it is going to be. People Prince Harry is doing his level best to protect his child from the buzzards calling themselves the press. If the Queen is satisfied with how Harry is doing things why do the press complains. Harry has the permission of the Queen to do as he wants with his family in regards to the press. Anyone thinking otherwise is dumb as a bag of rocks and stuck on stupid. The royal family’s past with Harry’s mother in regards to the press is front and center in Harry’s mind. Harry will never forgive the press taking pictures of his dying mother instead of trying to help. NEVER, EVER, EVER. He has said so in an interview before he met Meghan. These feelings are there long before Meghan came along.

    • kerwood says:

      I’d forgotten about that @blunt talker. That’s the kind of thing that no-one gets over. And now Harry is dealing with virulent racism, something that he’s never had to deal with before. Hours after his baby was born, a member of the British media was calling his son a ‘monkey’. Why wouldn’t he want to keep his son as far away from these people? He knows that if anything every happened to his child (god forbid), those vultures would just snap away.

      • Lainey says:

        Thanks, Kerwood! The trolls who come here with their nonsense are clearly not living their best lives.

  36. A says:

    She looks good. The look isn’t too casual for Wimbledon at all, it’s perfect, and I think it’s funny that people want to make noise about this type of thing. I absolutely think that her decision to go after Kate was a calculated one, it insulates her from some of the inevitable criticism she’d get if she’d gone before the patron of the tennis club or whatever. And yeah, these details absolutely matter. Kate going in her capacity as patron is work, but Meghan going with a couple of friends in a pair of jeans is her downtime.

    Not surprised that they haven’t released the names of the godparents. I wonder if we’ll find out in due time, and I think we will, but iirc, godparents are something of a big deal among the aristocracy. It’s an honour to be chosen as such. I can’t wait for them to release pictures of the christening. I think Harry and Meghan are still trying to navigate their boundaries with the press. Fwiw, I don’t think they see them as the enemy at all, and as far as Archie is concerned, I think they’re still unsure of what the future might hold for him in terms of royal duties and such, so it’s better to keep him out of the public eye for the time being because you can’t walk that stuff back in the future. And you don’t want to wind up like Beatrice or Eugenie, who get all the scrutiny, but never fully managed to carve out a concrete role within the royal family.

  37. Maria says:

    +1

  38. Penguin says:

    Thinking again, I like the overall look, and like the blazer better than in Oz. But what I would have really liked to see are those fab flats from the baseball again. The heels don’t work with the jeans

  39. Mary says:

    I absolutely agree that it is possible that the godparents simply do not want to be exposed to terrible trolling by the Meghan haters (which apparently has already happened online with the two women that attended the match).

    Also, does this not help the godparents in any privacy invasion legal case if the godparents are deemed “private citizens”?

    Finally, my pet theory is that the real intent here is to stop any further Markle rantings from either Senior or Samantha. I am wondering if Ashleigh or another relative of Meghan’s might be a godparent. If so, Samantha would either or both: go apesh*t and very publicly start a campaign to try to reconcile with that person (as a doomed attempt to get in with the Sussexes). If I were Ashleigh or her brother Christopher, or even Nicole for that matter, I would want to do everything I could to avoid any contact or connection with Samantha.

    I guess that what I am saying is that this may have absolutely nothing to do with privacy concerns regarding Archie or any feud with or distancing from the royal reporters. Maybe the Sussexes are just (as the press release indicates) abiding by one or more of the godparents’ wishes and/or trying to protect them from the hate normally levelled at the Sussexes’ friends.

    • Moose says:

      Mary, you make a good point. By keeping the godparents names private, should they subsequently be named in the press M&H know they have an “inside” leak. Then if the godparents are harassed, followed etc by the RRs for salacious gossip and find their family being intruded upon and their names trashed in the media they can make a complaint or take legal action…

  40. Reece says:

    She’s doing a lovely business casual. They need to STFU!

    “… Genevieve Hillis’s cousin’s mother-in-law’s neighbor ran a meth lab and how dare Meghan expose Archie to such a person?”
    Dead. Deadeth. Deceased.

  41. Valiantly Varnished says:

    She looks fantastic and happy.

  42. Mrs. Smith says:

    Fun fact—Michelle Yeoh wore the same LAgence blazer/pants in the mahjong scene from Crazy Rich Asians. I watched the movie last night and did a double take when I saw that jacket! It was fun to see the complete suit (styled differently).

  43. Sidewithkids says:

    The Daily Mail is just the trashiest tabloid. The “people” who comment say the most hateful and at many times lie about things they haven’t bothered to research or look up. Anybody who believes a word of that filth is just as filthy. Everyone needs to leave this woman alone. I have not seen one instance where she did anything to disrespect British Royalty. She’s just doing things differently but not wrong. It’s not wrong to be different. Its wrong if you don’t understand that.

    • Snowflake says:

      +1

    • Citresse says:

      If the DM is the trashiest tabloid, then it’s interesting it was included as priority reading at Balmoral and in London among certain senior royals….this according to info spilled by former butler Paul Burrell.
      I can’t imagine the late Queen mother and Prince Charles having read the DM every day, but perhaps they did??????

      • Moose says:

        I wouldn’t believe anything Paul Burrell says! He sold his soul to the devil a long time ago…

  44. Molly says:

    Take a look at Meghan’s friends of 20 plus years. They could be your sister or best friend. This is why Meghan is so interesting. When you think you know, she does something like this, totally unexpected.

  45. Rina says:

    Meghan looks great!

    Why is it necessary to reveal the names of the godparents? Can you imagine the frenzy of media intrusion in the lives of those individuals? Harry, Meghan, and the godparents they chose for Archie made the right decision by keeping this private.