As we discussed, the Duchess of Sussex spoke on camera on the ITV documentary, Harry & Meghan: An African Journey. She spoke about how all of the smears have affected her over the past year, during the vulnerable months of her pregnancy and post-pregnancy. All of the shrieking and nastiness aimed at Meghan this summer was… her maternity leave, remember? And those fools in the tabloids couldn’t keep her name out of their mouths. Anyway, anyone who’s paid attention to royal gossip over the past few years knows the deal: every fragile white person in the media has made it their life’s mission to denigrate, insult, smear and mock Meghan. Their collective goal seems to be “bully Meghan until she leaves Harry and leaves Britain.” I’m not even joking – Tatler said as much months ago. Speaking of, Tatler’s coverage of both Harry and Meghan’s clips included a weird final note, and I think we should discuss it:
The poignant interview is part of a documentary that explores the highs and lows of their ten days in Africa in September. The Duke of Sussex has previously talked about the negative effect – ‘the relentless propaganda’ – of the tabloid press and how much of an impact it was having on his wife. The Duchess of Sussex’s interview reiterates the statement released by his Royal Highness at the beginning of the month. ‘There is a human cost to this relentless propaganda, specifically when it is knowingly false and malicious, and though we have continued to put on a brave face – as so many of you can relate to – I cannot begin to describe how painful it has been.’
Should there be a movement to abolish the monarchy on human rights grounds? The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may well be in favour of such a thing.
I love how the media reaction to Harry and Meghan standing up and saying “this isn’t right” is to assume that the Sussexes… want to abolish the monarchy. Are media peeps being willfully obtuse? “Oh, the Sussexes say we’re being racist, sexist bullies, instead of examining our racist, sexist coverage, let’s just chalk racism and sexism as the cost of doing business and we’ll change the subject to whether or not the monarchy should be abolished.”
As for the mention of “human rights” – I found that shady. Remember how Prince William was having all of those private dinners with Rose Hanbury and then he contacted his lawyers to shut down all of the rumors? His lawyers said that the stories were “a breach of his privacy pursuant to Article 8 of the European Convention to Human Rights.” William sees it as his human right to screw around on his wife and use his pregnant sister-in-law as a human shield to deflect from criticism. Meanwhile, all Meghan said was, basically, being smeared and racially abused and lied about during her pregnancy was tough. Sigh…
Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Avalon Red.
They really do the most. Instead of a stance against bullying and racism, they’ve made it about H&M wanting to abolish the status quo. They never said any of that, but if you want to get a bunch of nobles and royalist on your side, then tell them the uppity black duchess wants to take away your titles.
The really do, don’t they? They know their audience, and I sometimes like their articles, but it’s pretty obvious where they are when it comes to Meghan. All I can say is that she didn’t get a Tatler cover when she was just rumoured to be dating Harry, whereas a certain other trust fund do-nothing aristo-adjacent blonde girl certainly did (*cough* Cressida Bonas *cough*).
The Tatler set, like the Turnip Toffs, really do not like Cathy Middleton Cambridge as she is not really their “ilk”. I have no doubt Ma Middleton had to sell her soul, among other things, to come to a working understanding and working agreement with The Tatler.
BayTampaBay
You do know that Kate’s college friend from St Andrews is the editor of Tatler
@ BTB
Lol…
“Sell her soul, among other things….” like her children’s souls, perhaps?
Completely agree TheOriginalMIA
It’s just about riling the upper class up against Meghan
I for one welcome one our republican queen, your duchess could never 💅
(Sarcasm, for clarity’s sake).
Honestly, this has got to be one of the most ridiculous theories I’ve ever heard, so much so that I quite like it. It’s just so outlandish it’s hilarious.
Abolished it should be, it’s a completely unsustainable system. Being a royal used to mean being above the ‘common people’. That’s what monarchies were based on. A royal had ‘blue blood’ and married ‘blue blood’. They never married ‘commoners’. That kept them above everyone else. In modern times, this all changed. So the whole meaning of being royal has changed. A logic development, yes, but now it just underscores how the entire idea of being royal, is completely outdated. And it creates situations as these, where ‘normal’ people come in completely not fitting in.
Absolutely. The monarch traditionally is believed to be “chosen by God”. Without getting into any religious debate (if a country’s subjects are secular, how does someone chosen by something they don’t believe in have power over them, for example), previous kings and administrations have completely trodden on this anyway (Henry IV deposing the “rightful” king, beheading Charles I, the joint English-Dutch coup against James II).
@Lenn, You are so correct. Why do you think “Jean-Christophe Napoleon Bonaparte, the great-great-great nephew of the famous Emperor, married Countess Olympia von und zu Arco-Zinnerberg at Les Invalides, herself related to the Archduchess Marie-Louise”?
Even The Duchess Rootinuttin Von Moneybags admitted that this marriage has been arranged for years but delayed so Jean and Olympia could go out and have real fun with their real friends before they were condemned to a life of boredom with each other (like Bill & Cathy) and condemned to eternal hell with each other families (like the Middletons & Windsors).
Question: Are not the Windsors really Glucksburgs in the male line?
@BayTampaBay, word. The aristocrats and continental royals had a sort of heydey a while ago when they were all marrying commoners, but like, all of those commoners were filthy rich and came with bags of money, which is why they married them in the first place. Marie-Chantal Miller, Chantal Hotchouli (Prince Ernst August’s first wife) etc. Even Maxima comes from a fairly wealthy family. So does the Queen of Sweden. And the ones who don’t, such as Letizia and Mary in Denmark, they’re treated…pretty badly by the press. Maybe Mary less so, but I remember how reviled she is in some corners of the internet.
I’ve been trying to find this one particular issue of Vogue which had an article abt this and failing. It talked abt how the Queen and other royals had this outlook of where everyone “ranks” in the world. If you were a commoner marrying in, it didn’t matter how rich you were, or how successful you are, you’re still a commner, and the expectation is that you basically become a sycophant around the royals because you should know your place. It was written in the 90s, I honestly buy that this attitude hasn’t changed at all.
“you’re still a commner”
“I honestly buy that this attitude hasn’t changed at all”.
@A says, No Shit Sherlock!
AGREE! Which is the real reason why “the powers that be” wanted Prince Charles to Marry Lady Diana Spencer and not Camilla Shand.
ETA: I think, but may be wrong, that HSH Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg’s wife comes from a metric-shit-tonne of money too. I know for sure Karl von Habsburg married a very very mega-rich girl named Francesca Anne Dolores Freiin Thyssen-Bornemisza whose mother was some famous British model.
I will have to ask my good friend Duchess Rootinuttin Von Moneybags what she knows! LOL!
Camilla didn’t want to marry Charles, both she and Anne wanted to marry Andrew P-B. Diana’s grandmother wanted any of her three granddaughters married to British Royals. She was the Queen Mum’s lady-in-waiting and trusted friend from the time the Queen Mum was the Duchess of York. Scheme didn’t work out with Lady Sarah, but it worked with Diana.
Maria-Teresa of Lux comes from a wealthy family, but it didn’t stop her racist MIL from calling her ‘la negrita’ and ‘the little Cuban’. But the money was the reason Josephine-Charlotte finally agreed to the marriage.
The new hereditary Grand Duchess (lazy heir’s lazy wife) comes from an impoverished noble family but traces her “noble bloodline” back to the 13th century. Land rich, money poor, and eight kids to get married off or put in nunneries. Mathilde in Belgium was similar, Polish/Belgian nobility without money.
nota, Thanks for your update and clarification.
I read in an A.N. Wilson book that “the powers that be”, whomever they are, wanted Charles to marry an girl from the British Titled Aristocracy and she had to be a virgin.
Looking at pictures from when he was younger, I have always found Andrew Parker Bowles very attractive. I can understand Camilla and Anne both wanting to marry him. I feel the same way about the David Somerset, 11th Duke of Beaufort.
I’m sure Camilla not being a virgin would be an obstacle to some at the time, but the much bigger obstacle was she didn’t want him. She wanted Charles as a fling, but wanted APB for life. I’m not convinced she wanted to marry him in 2005, but public pressure was on for them to make it official.
nota, Again, I must agree with you so we must be drinking the same tea. I never was 100% convinced that Camilla wanted to marry Charles in 2005 either. I think Camilla enjoyed being “the Royal Mistress”.
I read somewhere, but cannot recall where, that Charles push to marry her started after the Edward Bernard Charles van Cutsem – Lady Tamara Katherine Grosvenor when Camilla was supposed snubbed based on seating. Charles took offense but Camilla could have not cared less.
I think that people forget the biggest factor in Charles’ decision about whether he should marry Camilla or go for someone else, and that’s Louis Mountbatten. Mountbatten is the one who famously gave him the advice that he should “sow his wild oats” as a bachelor, and then settle down with a nice, simple girl with “no history” because that would make for an easier marriage. I don’t know quite where the, “Diana was a virgin because Charles had to marry a virgin” story started, but I definitely think that Charles simply didn’t think his relationship with Camilla was that serious either, until it was too late.
ETA: Nota, are you talking about Diana’s grandmother, Baroness Fermoy? Didn’t she specifically NOT want Diana to marry into the royal family? Iirc, she told her something like, “they’re not like you and me, they’re very different people, I don’t think you’d get along,” or something like that?
Imagine if this kind of thinking applied elsewhere. Oh Martin Luther King, you don’t like that buses are segregated? Well I guess we should just GET RID OF ALL BUSES??? Like, no, fix the inequality in the system not get rid of the whole damn thing.
That said, I’ll be first to sign up to abolish the monarchy. Meghan has a natural aristocracy about her that has nothing to do with bullshit bloodlines and everything to do with goodness that shines from her soul.
The British monarchy will fail because the BRF does not know how to successfully do their jobs unlike the Royal Families of Spain, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Luxembourg…etc…
It is very sad if the BRF would rather destroy the whole system than have Meghan as a member.
I have to ask, do the Spaniards actually like their royal, family? Things are hot again in Catalonia and hear people call the Queen “Rictus”. Are those other royal houses really popular, or are they fairly low key compared to the UK Royals and most people go about their lives not thinking about them?
I have friends in Florida who are Spanish nationals. I know they have great respect for the current King, Felipe VI, but no so much his sister Cristina whose husband I think went to jail causing her to lose her HRH style and Duchess title.
My Spanish national friends do not talk (gossip) about the Spanish Royal Family the way “we” talk about the BRF.
British media are really dumb.
You spelled racist wrong.
LOL
Imagine if after all this time, it’s not world war, paedophilia allegations, accusations of murder and the death of a senior royal in suspicious circumstances that brought about a republic, but one mixed race American woman.
On one hand it would be amazing, but on the other Meghan would be a target for crazies so maybe not today.
Wait, whut??? Can you please point me in the direction of suspicious deaths and murder allegations??? (Or is that the princess Diana conspiracy theory). Intrigued!
The Diana stuff is the most prominent, but I’m thinking of the very handy death of Epstein, and the nurse that committed suicide after the Australian radio prank (some think it is a David Kelly case).
There is no way of proving any of it obviously, but there’s also the fact that the RF hush up any accidents pretty quickly (Philip and his car crash, the lady that got hit at the parade) – none of it makes them look favourable.
LMAO….. a family history of murder, incest, torture, pedophilia, colonization, theft , adultery and more could not bring down the monarchy but a little American biracial woman and her avocado toast will do it……LMAO.
Ive seen some extreme fascist types (like the ex apprentice turned major troll and presidential favourite) tweet that Meghan is a left wing plant to destroy the monarchy. Seems that view is being supported mainstream.
Trash media.
You’ve gotta understand…the Tatler is kind of a stupid publication all around. I still remember they had tips for how to look after a large manor house, from some lady who was a duchess, and one of her suggestions was to save the bath water from the night before to reuse the next day, and to give hot water bottles to their guests to cut back on heating costs. And saving crusts from the previous days sandwiches for the next day’s breakfast.
Their tone is weird and I find it difficult to parse at times, but this comes off to me as sarcastic and kind of mean tbh. I haven’t read the rest of the article, but I wouldn’t put it past them for being shady and awful. They’re a society publication that mostly talks about posh white people in England. But I don’t know how serious they are at any level. This seems like they’re mocking her. “oH dO yOu ThInK mAyBe We ShOuLd AbOlIsH tHe MoNaRcHy On HuMaN rIgHts GrOuNds????? LOL”
The Tatler is mocking Meghan and everyone who pays money to subscribe.
The Tatler is a very poorly written publication. I have seen so many errors that could have easily been fact checked such as when The Tatler claimed Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney married an Englishman when it was actually her cousin, Consuelo Vanderbilt, and sister-in-law, Pauline Payne Whitney, who married Englishmen.
Conde Nast’s (USA based) Town& Country is a much more fun and much better society rag than The Tatler.
The Tatler is essentially run by a bunch of trust fund children for whom all of this is a social hobby, not a serious platform. The only real purpose to the Tatler is to splash pictures of all the society dos and functions, publish a few listicles (with helpfully bad hints about how to run a manor house from a real aristocratic lady no less), and maybe throw in a few recs for expensive hand cream. They’ve always been badly written.
I think the bigotry is the whole point – these people don’t feel good about themselves unless they think they’re “superior” to someone. Really, isn’t that what hereditary titles are about? – by an accident of birth you claim to be better than someone who is smarter, kinder, more charming, or more successful than you are?
Keith Richards thought and said exactly the same thing when he was sounded out on the offer of a knighthood.
That magazine is just trash written on glossy paper. These people are so insular and inbred. I guess they issued their warning to a certain other royal in that last statement. Is that the posh equivalent of snitches get stitches, looking at you William? Now it’s just getting a bit laughable. Anything to avoid behaving a bit decently and actually doing real objective journalism that’s not lies and stereotypes.
Growing up, storybooks created the notion that a king/queen was all powerful. Looking at the current British monarchy, im disappointed to realize its all a façade. Its nothing but a ceremonial role. Unless of course youre cheating on your wife or been discovered to be a paedo or you want to kill your ex daughter in law, then youve got some clout. But never to effect positive policy to help your nation and to stand against the inhumanity that is racism. Nope. You should have no comment there. The queen is a disgrace. As is the future king and the one who will take on after him. I hate the whole of KP.
Reminder that the editor of Tatler is a friend of the Cambridges, from their days at St. Andrews. His partner is Alexandra Shulman, formed EIC of Vogue UK – 12 WOC on the Vogue UK cover in her 25 years in charge, and of that only 2 black models, said of these stats that “my chief remit wasn’t to show ethnic diversity as a policy. You would sell fewer copies.” Shulman regularly appears in the DM these days as a fashion columnist singing the praises of the style of one Kate Middleton. Take what Tatler says and set it on fire because it’s Trash.
With him in charge, it is another obvious W&K/Middleton PR machine.
Use Tatler to line the birdcage first and it will burn faster.
This – its obvious that they are getting info from Katie Keen, am sure he has her number.
They are such “good friends” that he wasn’t even invited to her wedding. Are you friends with all your former uni colleagues?
The UK tabloids are making too much money off smearing Meghan so it’s not going to stop. She’s supposed to just “take it” and never call them out on it. This whole “distract and deflect” strategy is just dumb and only showing how guilty they are. They want to be able to say and do whatever they want as long as it generates traffic to their website.
An article posted late this afternoon on The Daily Fail generated 2.1K comments in 37 minutes. The Daily Fail online is making some mega monie$.
Amazing how Meghan has time to both cause worldwide drought and abolish an archaic institution.
They go on and on about how “minor” a royal she is yet she’s powerful enough to do all this? Pick a lane. Give me a break.
‘ Their collective goal seems to be “bully Meghan until she leaves Harry and leaves Britain.” ‘
This has been the goal since they first started dating – the goal of the tabloids, RRs, racists, the haters on tumblr. To stop Harry from marrying her, to endanger her pregnancy, now to get her to leave. They’ve been doing this nonstop for three years next month.
If Meghan exits stage right do you think the tabloids and their commentariat will start beating up on Duchess Doolittle again?
I agree with what Morrigan said below, but @Bay, I think the tabloids would continue to blame Meghan for a long while, before *maybe* going back to being more critical of the Cambridges and their lack of work. It would depend on how things went with M/H and their exit, where they went, how visible they are, etc. But they need someone to gang up on and if Meghan’s gone, who knows.
I know that Tom Sykes is trash but I finally just got around to reading this entire article and I definitely came away with the feeling that there’s more to come? Like that another shoe is going to drop, soon. I hope I’m wrong.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/royal-family-at-war-harry-and-meghan-source-claims-they-have-single-handedly-modernized-the-monarchy
Thing is, I think all the people who want this are coming to realize that if Meghan did actually leave, Harry would leave right along with her. There have been hints that they know, some articles that have lines of “don’t take Harry away” and such aimed directly at Meghan.
Everyone damn well knows that Harry only stayed with the Monarchy because of his Grandmother. Dude actually did 2 REAL army tours, and has money he inherited from his mother. He would be able to fend for himself very well in the real world. Meghan also has her own money and residuals from her film and tv work for life as well as a pension. She never needed Harry’s money to be successful or happy. People who think she’d never give up the title and kick rocks out of there don’t get not only that she would, but that Harry would probably be out ahead of her wrt doing it. They could both quite happily continue their charity work in the states, and out here in LA (where I live) people wouldn’t blink twice seeing them around. And the tabloid culture in the US is a totally different animal in that you do NOT see reports for TMZ or the National Enquirer on the national news discussion stories they’ve written. No respectable news orgs take them seriously, and regular people just look on them as an amusing joke.
So yeah. Meghan leaves, Harry’s going with her, likely even leading the way out. And deep down, they know it.
Tatler sounds like Dear Orange One. Pricks.
Tatler is a disgusting publication. They had this gross story a couple months ago about “2019 Social Climbers!” and Meghan was at the top of the list. They basically implied that it was ~sooooo~ unexpected that she’d made good, and that she came from an underprivileged background. When she didn’t! She had a middle-class upbringing, attended private school, graduated from college, and was a successful TV actress! The undertone to all of this was basically ‘this biracial woman MUST have come from the lower classes originally because that’s where people of color fit into the world’.
I am sickened by what has happened between the Cambridges and the Sussexes. The media has its own agenda, and Prince William does not have to help them with it, but what I think no one inside the palace realizes is that they were strongest, all of them, when William and Kate and Harry and Meghan were still the Fab Four. For the monarchy to still exist by the time William takes over, he needs Meghan and Harry to be the rock stars they are. William and Kate are in no threat of being overshadowed. William is the heir. No popularity contest can change that. The family need all the good press they can get. The last time they faced an abolish-the-monarchy campaign was over the bullying of Diana, and her subsequent death. All this press against Harry and Meghan, fueled in part from within the family, will take them all down. Fighting brothers and their wives sell newspapers, but it’s this that will destroy them in the end. We’ve all got too much of that in our own lives. We look to the monarchy for the fantasy of better. Without the fantasy, the “Royals, they’re just like us!” joke will no longer be a joke. They will be just like us. And then they will have no purpose.
After seeing this much I really feel they can’t win this fight. The press will always twist their words and manipulate the outcome so it might be best not to give them munition to do so. Just suck it up, ignore them, pretend everything is dandy, smile and wave when in public, gush how everyone has been so welcoming and wonderful, basically lie through their teeth and play their game. The whole royal family seems fake and insencere so maybe this should work better .