Prince Harry & Meghan Markle pictured on date in London

Okay, I’m wading back into the Harry and Meghan pond because Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were photographed out together in London on Wednesday.

The Sun has photos of Harry and Meghan holding hands while walking in London on Wednesday, February 1, after having dinner at Soho House. This came after Harry got back to London from his engagements in Nottingham.

The Sun has a quote from ‘an onlooker’ who said:

    “They tried to keep as low-key as possible and were sitting in a small snug area of the restaurant. But it wasn’t a private area and they were happy to be seen. Gary Lineker and a whole host of the Made In Chelsea cast were also there, but they only had eyes for each other.”

They also have a quote from a ‘friend’, who says:

    “Meg is not filming in Toronto at the moment so she is free to spend all her time with Harry. They’ve taken things to the next level. They’re practically living together. She cooks for him, he pops out to the gym and they’re just enjoying hanging out. Meg has always enjoyed spending time in London, but she’s really putting down roots. I can see them engaged by spring. I know that sounds a bit crazily soon, but he’s head over heels and they can’t bear to be apart. She’s said she’s ready to give up acting and move to London. He wants to start a family and so does she. Watch this space.”

[The Sun]

The first thing I noticed is that I officially dislike Meghan’s casual style. So if she does become Duchess Meghan (Duchess Rachel? (her real first name) ), I’m not sure I’m going to get the “royal whose style I really love” thing from her.

Second thing I noticed: Harry, you’re wearing a nice jacket, take off the ugly hat.

Considering Meghan is 35, her TV series is winding down, and she’s still a low-level actress, I’m not surprised that she’d be willing to hang up her acting career for a career as a royal wife. She’ll have more time to do charity work and really focus on that if she wants to, although I highly doubt she will work more than Kate considering, for whatever reason, Harry is not willing to be seen outworking William. I’m not sure how giving up her jobs to be a royal fits into Meghan’s “focus less on glass slippers and more on pushing through glass ceilings” thing, but if that’s her choice then good for her.

I don’t have much to say about Meghan because I only know her from the few pap photos I’ve seen and the Tig Talk articles I’ve read, although I’ve read a good number of debates about her in various internet comment sections. I’m not opposed to the idea of Duchess Meghan (and have already thought about what I would do, blog-wise, should there be an engagement announcement), but I’m not excited for it either. I would say I’m a bit on the negative side, just because I have a negative view of those Tig Talk articles and that’s really the only place I know her from.

I think those Tig Talk articles are so shallow and boring. Meghan proudly proclaimed she came up with the six questions herself when she started her blog, but they are the most shallow and boring questions. I’m shocked that she got actual, well-known celebrities to give her an interview and then gave them those shallow, boring questions. In return, of course, she got shallow, boring answers. Meghan writes intros on the person being interviewed and their work but I’d much rather hear the person’s thoughts on their work than what they think everything tastes better with.

Anyway, now I’m just complaining, so I’ll stop. But I want to leave you with this: Please be respectful of fellow commenters. Not everyone shares the same opinions on Meghan, and that’s fine, but please don’t insult other commenters for having a differing opinion. It is possible to rebut someone’s argument without shutting them down and being dismissive (which is what the Kate fans usually do to us whenever we say any sort of criticism about her). Also, please don’t insult Kate. There is no reason to insult Kate in order to praise the other women we talk about on here.

255 Comments on Prince Harry & Meghan Markle pictured on date in London

  1. Kitty
    February 3, 2017 at 12:33 am (2 months ago)

    His popularity seems to be in an all time low recently. Why? He’s better than William and Kate.

    • Ellie
      February 3, 2017 at 12:43 am (2 months ago)

      Err, no. Why do you think this?

      • Birdy
        February 3, 2017 at 1:13 am (2 months ago)

        All the UK tax payers I’ve asked love her, as do I. We also all watch Suits as do all my kids. Harry is wearing a woolly hat because it’s very cold and to try and keep under the radar. It’s a simple woolly hat, you may not like them but it’s hardly ugly.
        I’m in team Meghan and look forward to a wedding. If she makes Harry happy that’s great because I love a happy Harry and he deserves happiness.
        She doesn’t need to work as hard as Kate or be as high profile she’s not married to an heir. I doubt she’ll have two huge houses etc etc.

        • NLopez
          February 3, 2017 at 3:14 am (2 months ago)

          +1 Birdy. Id love to see them wed

        • katemiddletonreview
          February 3, 2017 at 3:18 am (2 months ago)

          I mentioned Meghan not outworking Kate because so many people have said that Harry’s wife will totally outwork Kate.

          Re my dislike of Meghan’s outfit and Harry’s hat: Fashion is subjective.

          • Cathy
            February 3, 2017 at 6:37 am (2 months ago)

            Your comment gets a +1 from me too Birdy as I like a happy Harry too.
            And as for the wooly hat, I remember from my London days that evenings at this time of year are cold or maybe he is trying to hide his obviously red hair?

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 11:24 am (2 months ago)

            I think the hat is a way to be low key. His red hair is really bright, and it’s a give away if he is trying to go incognito. When he goes out without a hat to hide his hair, he gets regular people taking his picture directly and indirectly and posting them to twitter.

            It’s less conspicuous of him to go out hiding his red hair.

            Granted i hate beany hats, but better this than that ridiculous baseball hat he was using.

            I don’t think this is a style statement.

          • katemiddletonreview
            February 3, 2017 at 9:47 pm (2 months ago)

            I hate beanies, so I’d rather a baseball hat. But like I said elsewhere, fashion is subjective. I dislike Harry’s hat. Other people don’t. I don’t understand why my saying I think Harry’s hat is ugly is such a big deal.

          • Herazeus
            February 4, 2017 at 7:57 am (2 months ago)

            KMR, i wasn’t arguing against your dislike of the beanie hat. I was saying that in this situation, i think the hat is probably for protection from public or an attempt to be low key by obscuring his hair so it’s not immediately obvious that it is him when he is walking along a London street and in that way attract less attention.

        • G.
          February 3, 2017 at 8:20 am (2 months ago)

          I think they look cute together and would love to see Harry married in 2017.

          I agree with Cathy. Harry may be trying to hide his hair to be less recognizable.

      • Red Snapper
        February 3, 2017 at 1:53 am (2 months ago)

        Fun Fact: BP has a budget for private polling on the RF, its members and initiatives. However popular or unpopular a member (like Harry) *seems* to be, BP knows exactly what the public thinks about him.

    • BethNY
      February 3, 2017 at 5:59 am (2 months ago)

      This is in response to Kitty’s post that Harry’s popularity is at an all time low. I think it’s just the opposite. Harry’s popularity seems to be on the upswing now that he is no longer pictured falling out of nightclubs, in Vegas naked (gasp!), and various other immature gaffes.

      • Cathy
        February 3, 2017 at 6:37 am (2 months ago)

        +1

        • Laura
          February 3, 2017 at 3:15 pm (2 months ago)

          +2

  2. Ana
    February 3, 2017 at 12:37 am (2 months ago)

    i thought a henna tattoo last for 2 weeks, i was wrong.

    • Josuntravel
      February 3, 2017 at 12:46 am (2 months ago)

      I had henna twice now… and I got it off after 4 days the 2nd time and about a week the first

    • Cathy
      February 3, 2017 at 6:29 am (2 months ago)

      Really? Henna tattoos are meant to only last that long? Hmm, they last at least a month on my skin!

    • Herazeus
      February 3, 2017 at 11:27 am (2 months ago)

      It depends how you look after it. My indian friend told me to oil it all the time to protect it against moisture/water, and it lasted 6wks. Was a very awkward 6wks because i tried to avoid henna-d area getting wet and if i couldn’t avoid it, oiled it up first before wetting it.

      • EL
        February 3, 2017 at 11:51 pm (2 months ago)

        It also depends on how the henna was mixed. Some places sell very watered down henna while others give you a more concentrated version. In the Middle East and East Africa, we also some tea (and sometimes lemon) to the henna mixture. Apparently it helps boost the colour and how long it stays. Don’t know the science behind it but people swear by it.

        • Herazeus
          February 4, 2017 at 8:02 am (2 months ago)

          I can believe it’s watered down. Many things eg kohl, argan oil etc are watered down if you buy them in regular stores.

          I always shop in African or Middle Eastern or Indian stores for alot of fruit, vegetables, cosmetics and skincare. And go to regular stores for tinned goods.

          Ps: i miss Jack fruit. When we lived in East Africa i couldn’t get enough of it.

  3. Josuntravel
    February 3, 2017 at 12:44 am (2 months ago)

    Wow Wednesday night? And this was released Late Thursday… the sun sat on this for practically a whole day…. hmmmm I wonder if they are trading for holding out until his engagement was done today… The Sun had had the last three scoops, Norway Kate birthday present and now this! KP seems to be bartering with the Sun… wait till the NYE trip is over and we will tell you details, wait till Thursday evening before this pics… I will bet money that more to come from the sun very soon

    • aaa
      February 3, 2017 at 4:01 am (2 months ago)

      Good points.

      P.S.
      The thought entered my mind that someone from KP / Harry’s camp is negotiating with / working with the media behind the scenes since Meghan’s trip to London in December, specifically the trip where they were spotted buying the Christmas tree.

      • notasugarhere
        February 3, 2017 at 11:42 am (2 months ago)

        The person who spotted them at Christmas was an everyday person who shot cellphone photos through the windows of a moving bus.

        • aaa
          February 5, 2017 at 7:50 pm (2 months ago)

          The outing to get the Christmas tree was different than the outing where someone took a picture from the bus. Meghan was in London for a few days and there were multiple articles about her visit, and it seemed like one or more people from KP / Harry’s camp was providing color commentary.

    • Herazeus
      February 3, 2017 at 11:33 am (2 months ago)

      It won’t be the first time this has happened.

      The Palace makes these bargains all the time. Charles’s team is really good at these sorts of bargains. JLP used this technique to build up a positive image of William vs bad image of Harry – he would trade good william stories or ressurect bad Harry stories to kill bad William ones. Mind you, Charles did it yo build an image of caring father……

      It seems only William is bad at this media game.

      • Lobbit
        February 3, 2017 at 2:01 pm (2 months ago)

        Yes, I’d imagine that the BRF negotiates media coverage as a matter of course.

        And I agree – William is terrible at it. It’s sort of ironic that he’s so lacking in media savvy because they say that Diana encouraged him (at a fairly early age) to cultivate good relationships with the press.

        Good on Harry if he is working with the Sun, exclusively. The nasties at the DM can go kick rocks.

        • notasugarhere
          February 3, 2017 at 4:06 pm (2 months ago)

          The Sun has published (exclusively) some of the worst Harry scandals. I’d be surprised to see him work with them willingly.

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 5:59 pm (2 months ago)

            …..but remember how Sophie had to work with the now defunct News of the world to quash their sting of her with the fake shiekh and ensuing scandal…..

            That particular example shows that when it suits them, they will work with a paper, if not all media, they hate.

          • notasugarhere
            February 4, 2017 at 8:46 am (2 months ago)

            Maybe. Wouldn’t that require them having something on him (or her) that they’re holding back in exchange?

            Silly at this point, because no tabloid can be trusted not to go back on an agreement. In the era of social media, it would be found out anyway.

  4. Ellie
    February 3, 2017 at 12:44 am (2 months ago)

    I like Harry and want him to be happy, and if Meghan makes him happy, good; though I am cynical of her, her motives, and so on and so forth for all the reasons hashed and re-hashed here and elsewhere.

    • Cat
      February 3, 2017 at 1:47 am (2 months ago)

      Me too, but I will give her the benefit of the doubt.

      • M from Germany
        February 3, 2017 at 9:07 am (2 months ago)

        Funny how Meghan gets the benefit of doubt, but Kate never seeems to…

        • Lauri from Ca
          February 3, 2017 at 10:36 am (2 months ago)

          Hi M, I can only speak for myself but I know that I used to give Kate the benefit of the doubt. But then she and Will take their second honeymoon to the Maldives, leaving George with the new nanny and Carole. It really irked me that after months of hearing that she can’t possibly do more engagements because she’s such a hands on mum, she was more than willing to leave her 10month old home with a new nanny while she is an 8 hour plane trip away. After that I started reading more about her life waiting for William, her lack of ambition,etc. and after 5+ years I no longer feel like giving either one of them the benefit of the doubt, I just want them to earn all their perks.

          • Cat
            February 3, 2017 at 10:08 pm (2 months ago)

            +1000

        • notasugarhere
          February 3, 2017 at 11:09 am (2 months ago)

          Kate Middleton was publicly royal-adjacent for 10 years and did nothing.

          Meghan Markle has been publicly royal-adjacent for 3 months. In that time she has continued to work her job and done a charity trip to India for a charity she’s worked with before she met Harry.

          If 10 years from now, Meghan Markle is bumming around London after having quit her job and waiting for Harry for 10 years? Then we’d be having a very different discussion.

          • Cat
            February 3, 2017 at 10:07 pm (2 months ago)

            Exactly!!

        • Sarah
          February 3, 2017 at 11:28 am (2 months ago)

          Kate and William had huge popularity and good will torwards them during the wedding and afterwards.
          Their actions or lack thereof have wisened people up. I would also say many people still do for that matter

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 11:35 am (2 months ago)

            I’m judgemental as hell, but i give all royal girlfriends the benefit of the doubt because the relationship could be transient and there is no need to judge someone who might never become important and funded by my taxes.

            Once they become a wife, all bets are off.

          • EL
            February 3, 2017 at 11:54 pm (2 months ago)

            + 1,000.

        • graymatters
          February 4, 2017 at 9:17 pm (2 months ago)

          I gave Kate years worth of benefit of the doubt; eventually, I just said, “enough.” Now she needs to show consistent effort. For example, she’s been off the radar for over a week now and her next scheduled appearance isn’t for another week. I suspect that she’s off on another holiday somewhere. Before, I would have assumed that she was preparing for a tour and so couldn’t attend the Paralympics — until pap photos proved otherwise.

          • katemiddletonreview
            February 4, 2017 at 9:33 pm (2 months ago)

            Kate’s next scheduled event is tomorrow, Feb 5. Then she has two on Feb 6, one on Feb 12, and one on Feb 14.

          • graymatters
            February 4, 2017 at 10:58 pm (2 months ago)

            Thanks! I only knew about the BAFTAs. Still, though, my point remains. If she works consistently throughout 2017 to the tune of 300+ engagements, I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt when she misses one because of illness or something in 2018. But she’s faffed around for so long with so many promises of hard work made on her behalf, that she’ll have to earn that benefit of doubt over the course of a year.

  5. Corgi
    February 3, 2017 at 1:09 am (2 months ago)

    Is it just me, or does Harry’s jacket not match his pants? And why is he wearing a suit jacket?

    • Ellie
      February 3, 2017 at 1:13 am (2 months ago)

      Looks like a suit jacket with jeans. It’s a trendy thing for guys to do. Suit jacket, dress shirt, jeans, but Harry’s jeans aren’t the nice, dark sort of pair you’d wear like this. It looks good when pulled off correctly.

      • Paula
        February 3, 2017 at 1:26 am (2 months ago)

        It doesn’t match, but at least his shirt seems pressed this time 😛

    • Carter
      February 3, 2017 at 3:42 am (2 months ago)

      For all the money Harry has he really dresses horribly. He wears a variation of the same thing all the time, and it never fits. At least his clothes are too baggy instead of too tight like his brother.

        • Carter
          February 3, 2017 at 11:54 am (2 months ago)

          Charles and Philip are so dapper! It pains me to see Charles and Philip so well dressed knowing how poorly dressed Harry and William are!

          • Angel
            February 3, 2017 at 12:38 pm (2 months ago)

            I feel that way too. Whether you like C or P you feel in the presence of someone who is grand and well polished..the prince mystque is maintained. H and W just..you have to like them because they don’t feel like anything ‘other’. I know they want to be normal, but then you, yourself hsve to be extraordinary. There is nothing to float you a bit in peoples estimation.

  6. Paula
    February 3, 2017 at 1:42 am (2 months ago)

    I’m the same, not opposed nor excited, but I must confess I was loving the gossip around them in the beginning (her being papped with that H+M necklace was everything).

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 3, 2017 at 3:31 am (2 months ago)

      I actually don’t really care if they marry as I’m not invested in her or them as a couple, but if it’s going to happen I would rather them do it sooner than later just so we don’t suffer months and months more of this current PR nonsense. An engagement announcement would come with it’s own annoying PR, but at least we’d have something concrete and it wouldn’t be Schrödinger’s Meghan like it was the last while.

      And hopefully once they’re engaged the palace will pay off her family to shut them the hell up.

      • Ellie
        February 3, 2017 at 3:50 am (2 months ago)

        “Schrödinger’s Meghan” – I snorted water out my nose! LOL!

      • notasugarhere
        February 3, 2017 at 11:31 am (2 months ago)

        I don’t think the Palace would pay off anyone to keep them quiet. They’d just weather the storm, as they’ve done with Uncle Gary’s many gaffes and the stripper cousin. As they did with Fergie, her father, all manner of things.

        Harry needs to learn about PR from HM and Charles, not from Jason.

        • Sarah
          February 3, 2017 at 11:47 am (2 months ago)

          Really? Have you heard ed sherhan comment about the bea sword incident? He doesn’t say ‘won’t’ he says he “can’t” or “not allowed” to talk about it. Made me think the palace paid him and I don’t think he’s someone who needs the money and is friendly with them. So I could see something
          https://youtu.be/7L-HR38uYYI

          • Carter
            February 3, 2017 at 11:57 am (2 months ago)

            Yea it probably depends on how damaging they feel the person in question is and how cooperative the person is to being voluntarily quiet. I got the sense Carole dealt with Uncle Gary so no need for the palace too get involved.

          • notasugarhere
            February 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm (2 months ago)

            I don’t see the Palace paying anyone off. They could “have a word” with someone like Ed, in the hopes that old-school pressure would do it. That isn’t going to do it for a couple of rogue Americans, so best to take the Never Complain, Never Explain attitude towards it.

          • Sarah
            February 3, 2017 at 1:04 pm (2 months ago)

            However you want to look at it, he was clearly silenced. I’m sure James blunt was too. Whether it’s having a word or paying them off, it essentially says that the palace or whomever in this instance maybe Andrew, shows that they aren’t above such machinations to silence bad stories when able.
            It could come from Harry, Charles or even Meghan herself but if things progress to engagement, I can see them wanting to put a kibosh on the family stories.

          • notasugarhere
            February 3, 2017 at 1:12 pm (2 months ago)

            I can see them wanting to quiet the relatives, but they’re not going to pay to do it. They didn’t keep Uncle Gary’s sting out of the papers, or Sophie’s or Fergie’s for that matter.

            They have no control over what a couple of Americans do, and paying them once to shut them up would only lead to them demanding more money over time.

            Old-school gentleman’s agreement won’t work? Then ignore it and move on.

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 6:03 pm (2 months ago)

            The Paoace doesn’t pay to quash stories.

            They do soft menace which is the opposite of soft diplomacy.

            Or as my mother says, they will stab you in the most polite, smiling way possible rendering you unable to fight back because you can’t pinpoint exactly what has paralysed you whilst being aware of the paralysis.

          • Jen
            February 4, 2017 at 1:34 am (2 months ago)

            Or, “I will kill your friends and family… to remind you of my love” (King George III/Hamilton reference).

  7. Ana
    February 3, 2017 at 1:45 am (2 months ago)

    only thesun had the exclusive, whoever took the photo was good i guess no other pap or photographer was around anyway i like her hair it’s shiny not like when she was papped at the airport in india😀

  8. Carter
    February 3, 2017 at 3:39 am (2 months ago)

    I’m all for Harry (and anybody) finding happiness so I wish them well. I just can’t get excited about her because I find celebrity lifestyle blogs and brands like Gwyneth’s Goop and Meghan’s Tig to be so shallow and pretentious. That being said I think they will marry as he seems ready and she seems willing. I just hope they don’t rush into marriage like the tabloids are suggesting, but take their time to make sure they got it right.

    One of the downsides to this relationship for Harry is that people are much more interested in his whereabouts. Every single vacation this guy takes is being reported on. I think we are going to find out that Harry is just as indulgent and takes just as many vacations as William and Kate.

    I also don’t think Harry’s wife, whoever that may be, is going to set the world on fire and totally out work and out shine Kate. I think some people are so underwhelmed and disappointed in Kate that they are going to project what they wish Kate was onto whoever it is that Harry marries. I think they will end up very disappointed.

    • aaa
      February 3, 2017 at 7:58 am (2 months ago)

      “I think they will marry as he seems ready and she seems willing.”
      If there was a way to pin a quote, I’d pin this!

      “I just hope they don’t rush into marriage like the tabloids are suggesting, but take their time to make sure they got it right.”
      I totally agree.

      “I also don’t think Harry’s wife, whoever that may be, is going to set the world on fire and totally out work and out shine Kate. I think some people are so underwhelmed and disappointed in Kate that they are going to project what they wish Kate was onto whoever it is that Harry marries. I think they will end up very disappointed.”
      I certainly see the projection that you see and agree that it will be a set up for disappointment. To me William, Kate and their children will win the long game, however, in the short-term, if Harry’s wife has “it” or if she and Harry as a couple have “it” they can set the world on fire and outshine William and Kate for a Camelot-type moment. The irony will be if they have enough “it” to generate a lot of attention to their causes, charismatic personalities and/or style and glamor, then it will likely also shed light on other things like their spending and vacation habits.

      P.S.
      Not that I see it as a game or a competition but I couldn’t think of a better term.

      • Carter
        February 3, 2017 at 8:31 am (2 months ago)

        I think initially there will be a honeymoon period. Harry and Meghan (or whoever) will be the golden couple who do no wrong unless from the get go one of them does something egregious (for example if Meghan slips up and does anything seen as political). But eventually if they stay married, especially as their youth and looks fade, they will be seen as hangers on. If they divorce it will be a circus. I don’t think Harry is interested in “competing”, for lack of a better word, with William otherwise he’d have done it by now.

        Their children hopefully will be titled like children of a duke rather than hrh so they aren’t stuck in the weird limbo of hrh but not working hrh. That way they can stay low key and be seen like Anne’s kids.

        • Angel
          February 3, 2017 at 10:13 am (2 months ago)

          +1 this dynamic has played out so many times before

    • Jen
      February 3, 2017 at 8:05 am (2 months ago)

      Yep, I feel the same way.

    • M from Germany
      February 3, 2017 at 9:11 am (2 months ago)

      I agree! I also do not think very highly of all these celebrity lifestsle blogs, ugh.
      And IMO, it would be a big mistake if they rushed into a marriage quickly. The tanloids should stop pressuring them, they have only been dating for moths!

    • JET Texas
      February 3, 2017 at 10:33 am (2 months ago)

      Agreed. I get annoyed at the idea that celebrities have discovered the secret to life that we plebs just keep missing. The hubris of it really puts me off.

      • Jen
        February 3, 2017 at 10:59 am (2 months ago)

        +1. Hubris indeed.

  9. abby
    February 3, 2017 at 4:19 am (2 months ago)

    Wow negative nancy. Harry is happy. Meghan is happy. That’s all that matters.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 3, 2017 at 4:21 am (2 months ago)

      I am negative about Meghan’s Tig Talk interviews because I think they are shallow and boring. And I stand by it.

      • abby
        February 3, 2017 at 4:26 am (2 months ago)

        Her casual clothes are not up to taste, her side project is shallow, one of her quotes (taken out of context!) is questioned and even Harry is criticised for wearing a beanie in winter. Come on the tone of this article is negative.

        • katemiddletonreview
          February 3, 2017 at 4:53 am (2 months ago)

          The things I’ve commented negatively on in this article about Meghan and Harry are all things I’ve commented negatively on about Kate. Meghan’s casual style and Harry’s hat – I constantly talk about when I dislike something Kate wears. Meghan’s quote – I constantly comment on Kate’s quotes and how they either sound inept or seem hypocritical. Meghan’s Tig Talk interviews (BTW, I did not say her whole blog was shallow, I specifically talked about the Tig Talk series and the six questions she asks) – I’ve talked about how Kate’s HuffPo article, her Queen at 90 interview, and her speeches all seem shallow and lack substance.

          A lot of my writing on Kate has a negative tone to it (unfortunately at times as I’ve really wanted to be more positive lately), and a vast majority of the comments about Kate are negative. Kate gets raked over the coals for almost everything, yet no one on here says “Well if Kate’s happy then that’s all that matters” (Kate fans may do that on other Kate blogs, but no one on here does). In this article, I’ve treated Meghan and Harry the same way I treat Kate. If it’s good enough for Kate, then it’s good enough for Meghan and Harry.

          • VickiV
            February 3, 2017 at 8:03 am (2 months ago)

            +1

      • M from Germany
        February 3, 2017 at 9:12 am (2 months ago)

        Agree 100% about Meghan’s shallow interviews, KMR.

    • Jen
      February 3, 2017 at 7:35 am (2 months ago)

      “Harry is happy. Meghan is happy. That’s all that matters.”

      On one level, this is perfectly true. I don’t know either of them personally, and can only draw my impressions from how each has publicly presented themselves. Plus we filter observations of such people through our own experiences as well. As a writer, KMR’s response to The Tig interviews is perfectly valid. And this is a critical blog; I’d expect nothing less.

      In terms of rolling out a relationship, this appears to consist of ‘friends’ with really loose lips, saying this and that for months on end. I presume ‘friends’ are really Harry and Meghan’s respective PR reps feeding the public via a chosen royal reporter. As a world-weary cynic, I read that approach as an attempt to play the public. It’s disingenuous that a couple who supposedly want to keep things quiet etc need to keep drip-feeding the public in this manner. I mean, who IS the third wheel ‘friend’ who could describe minute details of a ‘private’ Norwegian getaway? My eyes roll at the sheer vanity, self-absorption and cold self-promotion of the exercise.

      Both Harry and Meghan are flawed, both are experienced players, both want what they want. As long as they are clear with each other, then there should be no problem for them as a couple. I just wish they would cut the theatrics.

      Their clothes don’t worry me in this photo; they are having a private dinner on their own time so it’s a matter of personal taste, weather, and comfort. Totally their business. If they acquit their professional obligations reasonably well, and by all accounts they do, fine. I don’t buy into the PR initiatives that pump up their manufactured personas, because for me, it’s the quality and quantity of their professional work that I measure. Everything else is fluff.

      • Carter
        February 3, 2017 at 8:53 am (2 months ago)

        I agree with everything you said. Their PR strategy regarding the relationship is odd, and I can’t understand it. They are treating this relationship like a Hollywood relationship.

        • Jen
          February 3, 2017 at 10:50 am (2 months ago)

          It has been an odd strategy, but like it or not, Harry and Meghan need to own it. Had it not been for ‘friends’ and the string of heavy visual hints, no-one would have been any the wiser about their relationship. They could have enjoyed their privacy for as long as they wanted, given their adeptness at not being seen together.

          • Carter
            February 3, 2017 at 12:00 pm (2 months ago)

            That’s why I find it so bizarre! If privacy was really what they were aiming for, they had it! Why keep leaking things from “sources.” What’s their end game here?

          • notasugarhere
            February 3, 2017 at 12:12 pm (2 months ago)

            Proof they’re still dating. Will this silence the two round-the-bend tumblr fangirls? I doubt it.

          • Lobbit
            February 3, 2017 at 12:47 pm (2 months ago)

            But privacy doesn’t mean being reclusive or living in secret – it’s about control over one’s image and having the freedom to choose what aspects of your life you share with the world. That’s what they want – that’s what most of us want. There’s nothing odd about that imo.

          • Carter
            February 3, 2017 at 12:59 pm (2 months ago)

            @nota I guess you could be right. I just never pictured the BRF caring enough about what a couple people on tumblr are saying.

            Side note: I never have used or went to tumblr before but everyone kept mentioning these “tumblr fangirls” so I had a look. OMG! It’s insane over there! The conspiracy theories are out of control.

      • GreenTrees
        February 3, 2017 at 11:34 am (2 months ago)

        Jen, I’m here for every single word you wrote.

      • Sarah
        February 3, 2017 at 12:00 pm (2 months ago)

        Yep! this is my sentiment as well. I also feel they both have acted quite juvenile in certain aspects which is a huge turn off to me.

  10. Poppy
    February 3, 2017 at 6:00 am (2 months ago)

    I have to admit that I’m struggling to see Meghan as a royal wife, even if it is as wife of the ‘spare’. Yes she would have a less high profile role compared to Kate, but she would still have a fair bit of interest in her ( look at the interest & criticism Sarah Ferguson had to endure in the lead upto & after her marriage ). Every bit of her life would be scrutinized from press chasing not only her immediate family (who obviously aren’t shy of talking to the press) but also her ex-husband, male colleagues she’s been televised naked in bed with, every single person on & off screen she has ever had anything to do with – her whole life will be delved into. And as for her constant photos /comments/ updates on social media – all that would have to stop. The Royal Family have modernised but not to this extent. That is why royal brides to be are expected to have a blemish free ( some would say boding) past. The reason for that is so nothing/ nobody can come back & hit / claim / throw anything at the new royal or royal family after marriage! Could she put up with that!

    • M from Germany
      February 3, 2017 at 9:18 am (2 months ago)

      I agree! It would be a huge problem to kbow her opinions and everything and the images of her as a actress filming intimate scenes are not exactly princess material

      • JET Texas
        February 3, 2017 at 10:38 am (2 months ago)

        After the exploits of Princess Sofia and Melanie Trump, I think Meghan is pretty tame. I’m not making a political statement, just pointing out that women with much more scandalous backgrounds have reached levels of high(er) social status. Also, why harp on Meghan’s background when she is dating a guy who wore a Nazi costume, partied naked and punched a photographer? Does Harry get excused because he is born royal and a male?

        • Sarah
          February 3, 2017 at 1:52 pm (2 months ago)

          I love the people who act like Harry is a better catch because he’s Royal. He has no formal education, work ethic isn’t all that great and essentially lives off his family.
          She has a college degree, yes, maybe a c/d grade actress but is gainfully employed and sees the benefit of being altruistic…
          Why I may question certain things, she at least has made something of herself on her own.

          • Poppy
            February 3, 2017 at 2:39 pm (2 months ago)

            Firstly those 2 women are not possibly going to marry into a British tax payer funded royal family, so I don’t really care what they get up to. Secondly I never said anything bout harry being a better catch, I commented on how the press world wide would pry into every inch of her life, past & present and strip it down bare in the same way Harry’s past mistakes constantly get dragged up.Her past will come under a lot more scrutiny if rumours of a forthcoming engagement arise! There will be articles asking whether she’s suitable to become a member of the royal family, just as certain papers did with Kate who has a university degree!

          • Indiana Joanna
            February 3, 2017 at 3:37 pm (2 months ago)

            @Sarah, Love your comment about people thinking Harry is such a great catch!

          • katemiddletonreview
            February 3, 2017 at 9:29 pm (2 months ago)

            That’s true about Harry not really being that much of a catch if it weren’t for the royal title. Same with William. If they were Harry Smith and William Smith instead of Prince Harry and Prince William, would Meghan and Kate really feel the same way about them? Would we?

          • Jen
            February 4, 2017 at 3:20 pm (2 months ago)

            KMR, I’d say, no. W+H’s lives might have been easier though, and maybe better. Plain William Smith would not have been brought up to do nothing and would have needed to explore and develop his abilities, and also treat people well. Plain Harry Smith might have had a career in the army and been happy with that. Both might have attracted women who loved them, without the trappings. They do lead charmed lives, but it comes at a cost.

          • Sarah
            February 4, 2017 at 6:50 pm (2 months ago)

            I think Harry would still attract people becuase his charm resonates with people. As I said, he’s the naughty boy we all enjoyed in high school. so he’d probably still get the girls.
            If William didn’t have his titles, his romanticized version of normalcy would be a harsh reality for him. he probably would have flunked out of college. He’s floated around with out every really finishing anything and have people covering up for him. So no college degree, probably couldn’t keep a real job, not a charmer in the personality department. So we know Kate wouldn’t be interested and I don’t know many women who would.
            I used to think he was an ahole becuase his titles have allowed it. I now think he’d be one with out them too. Some people just are

    • notasugarhere
      February 3, 2017 at 11:24 am (2 months ago)

      It is not possible to be “blemish free” in the modern world. And how sexist to assume the woman has to be “blemish free” but Harry can do whatever he wants?

      Kate Middleton’s past is far from blemish free, and her family is no more a picnic than Markle’s step-siblings. Sarah Ferguson. Sophie, Marie-Christine had lives before marrying in.

      CP Mary, who threw out all of her overdue bill statements when she moved to Europe. Should have shredded them, because a reporter found them. Maxima’s parents weren’t allowed at the wedding because of her father’s past, but she was still embraced by the Netherlands. Mathilde who lived with a boyfriend for three years before meeting Philippe, but Catholic Belgium didn’t throw her out as a soiled dove. Letizia with the relatives who keep selling stories about her.

      All came with lives and histories of their own. Marry in, do the job, move forward. Meghan Markle could do that too I suspect.

      No matter whom he marries, they need to think hard about her role.

      Creating a UK-based charity for X and putting the majority of her time into that is a good option. It would be personal time, like Sentebale is for him. It would be trackable and watchable, like Madeleine’s work with Childhood. That is the best way for any future spouse to prove they will invest their personal time and energy into helping the people of the UK hands-on.

      Tig would have to go away, but she wouldn’t be required to stop all social media if she enjoys it. She could continue it in the name of the charity, give personal and work updates like Madeleine does, or have official accounts like Rania.

      • Carter
        February 3, 2017 at 11:48 am (2 months ago)

        Though I will agree with you that women are subject to double standards, Harry is allowed to do whatever he wants because he’s the royal. No matter what he does, he and his royal status are not going anywhere. Andrew is a testament to that.

        As unfair as it seems, anyone marrying in gets held to a higher standard than the ones born into it. If William and Harry were women I suspect their chosen significant others would be subject to criticism. After all, Prince Daniel and Chris O’Neill have had their fair share of criticism thrown at them.

        • katemiddletonreview
          February 3, 2017 at 9:42 pm (2 months ago)

          “As unfair as it seems, anyone marrying in gets held to a higher standard than the ones born into it”

          That’s why I’ve been much harsher on William in the last couple years. Because he deserves even more criticism than Kate for his lazy ways.

      • Herazeus
        February 3, 2017 at 11:55 am (2 months ago)

        ‘Blemish free’ lol where did this idea come from? Not even Prince Albert was considered blemish free, so we can’t blame the victorians.

        In a recent past where the current monarch is married to a consort with Nazi in-laws, the heir is married to one of his longstanding mistresses, the heir to the heir is married to a lazy, workshy, party girl with drug pushing uncle…..

        Spares in the recent history…..Margaret married a man so promiscous that it was a town joke AND he fathered an illegitimate child a week or two into their engagement.

        Andrew married a woman who had been a chalet girl for most of her working life, who was the mistress of a man who remains in their circle to this day. Makes the decision to ditch the soft pron actress seem unwise.

        • notasugarhere
          February 3, 2017 at 12:08 pm (2 months ago)

          To continue on your fabulous line.

          Anne married an unfaithful man who had an illegitimate child during the marriage, then married the man she got caught having an extra-marital affair with. She may or may not now be having an affair with her original target – Camilla’s ex husband.

          I wouldn’t be surprised if Paddy McN paid for Sarah’s half of the Swiss chalet.

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 12:58 pm (2 months ago)

            Nota: i agree regarding Sarah and Paddy.

            Without any evidence, i view all the Anne +Andrew PB cosiness very suspicious…..😉

          • JET Texas
            February 3, 2017 at 1:55 pm (2 months ago)

            I didn’t know any of this! Wow, so glad I check this blog. I think the idea of marrying-ins being held to a higher standard started with Diana. How the BRF wanted a girl “with a history but not a past”. An uncle she barely knew publicly vouched for her virginity. So silly. As for Meghan, a few loves scenes is nothing to get upset about. Standard work for actors. No private areas were shown, I assume. She hasn’t done anything scandalous that I’m aware of.

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 6:13 pm (2 months ago)

            Jet Texas: the idea of a girl without a past was put about by machiavellian uncle dickie who wanted to continue his success of marrying his nephew to the Queen by marrying their son to his grand-daughter.

            Most of Charles’s ideas about women were directly imprinted by uncle dickie. A clear case of beware who decides to mentor your children because uncle dickie was a penicious influence on Charles’s romantic life.

            And in a wierd way, uncle dickie also had a direct hand in the choice of Diana though he was long dead by the time they started dating because she offered Charles her condolences for his death and it was this small act of kindness that made Charles notice Diana as a potential romantic partner.

  11. Mrs BBV
    February 3, 2017 at 6:15 am (2 months ago)

    I am quite surprised that H. was at such a press haunted venue. Soho House is hardly the discreet choice and given the paps that hang round outside there it was rather inevitable they were snapped giving me to think they weren’t adverse to being so. I have never seen H. holding hands with any girl in public. I know he ws quite physically demonstrative with Chelsey at the Diana Concert but I think this is deliberately sending out a message.

    Whether I like it or not, and I’m not that enamoured by her family and her self publicising ways, I suspect she is ‘the one’ and that we are going to have an engagement this year. In some ways I thing she might be rather good……she’s obviously a worker with an altruistic instinct and I think she’s steely and smart. In other ways the idea of her bothers me and I think she’s auditioning for the greatest role of her life. But I do think she’ll cope with whatever’s thrown at her.

    • Carter
      February 3, 2017 at 8:16 am (2 months ago)

      There are many pictures of Harry and Chelsy holding hands walking out of night clubs through the years. He was just so not publicly affectionate Cressida (except for those initial ski pics) that I think people forgot how demonstrative he can be in public.

    • M from Germany
      February 3, 2017 at 9:21 am (2 months ago)

      Yes, I hate to think/say that, but I do not like the thought of Harry marrying Meghan. Maybe it’s because i still ship Harry and Chelsy, who knows 😉 I just think that meghan does not fit into the royal family…

      • Mrs BBV
        February 3, 2017 at 9:55 am (2 months ago)

        I was incredibly fond of Chelsy. She was in every way my definition of a modern princess. Xx

    • Sarah
      February 3, 2017 at 11:36 am (2 months ago)

      I think it’s funny that they felt the need to highlight and bubble said hand holding!!! Like people couldn’t see clearly on the pic!

  12. MAfromtheSix
    February 3, 2017 at 10:03 am (2 months ago)

    Maybe it’s just me, but I dig Meghan’s casual style. Perhaps it’s because she’s always papped in coats and I’ve loved every single one that she’s been photographed in. Loved!

    It would definitely be interesting to see the way that KP markets Meghan if/when she joins the royal household vs. K&W…

    • notasugarhere
      February 3, 2017 at 11:52 am (2 months ago)

      I’m a sucker for a good coat.

      Her work and street styles may end up as different as Letizia’s. At work, Letizia is tidy as a pin and often elegant. When she’s out shopping, Letizia wears slogan tshirts, no makeup, jeans, big boots, and sometimes one of her favorite leather jackets.

      http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0UUKVz9w7cE/VMlwiAfqY0I/AAAAAAAAY7M/y60d900t7g8/s640/Princess-Letizia-shopping-in-Madrid-3.jpg

      This is one of her more dressed up shopping trips
      http://files.gossip.it/paparazzate/letizia_ortiz_shopping/images/letizia_ortiz_fa_shopping_per_le_strade_di_madrid_in_incognito_d75f.jpg

    • Jen
      February 3, 2017 at 11:59 am (2 months ago)

      Mmm– it may be tricky. Meghan is no shrinking violet; she has an independent media profile that has nothing to do with who her partner is, and has forged a career for herself. So if the regular royal strategy is to have the ‘spare and spouse’ meekly stay in the shadows, there’s going to be trouble before long. Both H+M can work a room effortlessly so why should they be less than what they can be in deference to work-shy, charisma-free William and Kate? You only have to observe Harry chafing when he is with his brother and Kate at HT events; so tamped down. He may not be prepared to see his wife endure the same nonsense.

      The worst thing will be the comparisons between ‘English Rose’ Kate and ‘The Foreign’ Meghan, no doubt fueled by the DM/Middleton brigade. To minimise problems, Harry will need to:
      1. Separate his office from W+K;
      2. Pursue independent projects with M with a free rein;
      3. Minimise dual couple engagements;
      4. Have The Sun be ‘his’ mouthpiece.

      • Carter
        February 3, 2017 at 12:31 pm (2 months ago)

        Parts 1-3 I think are a natural evolution to Harry getting married. Right now he’s in this weird limbo of being the third wheel because he’s single and doesn’t do enough public work to warrant his own office.

        Part 4, though I suspect you are right, is so ridiculous that they would need a tabloid to be their mouth piece. Are tabloids different or seen differently in the UK? I just can’t imagine a government officials (which is what the royals are) in the US using Us weekly as their way of speaking to the public. (Not including Trump in this his media strategy is breaking all traditions).

        • Jen
          February 3, 2017 at 4:56 pm (2 months ago)

          It amazes me that royals do deals with certain members of the media but they have for ages. Charles has his little coteries of sympathetic journaiists /writers who seem to become ‘sources’. Diana was the same. Too much dependency on the media covering the BRF as necessary, hard-working and relevant is the reason they do it.

        • Herazeus
          February 3, 2017 at 8:20 pm (2 months ago)

          Carter: Regarding your question about UK tabloids, yes. Our tabloids are not like USA tabloids. American tabloid culture is quite different from UK tabloid culture. There are grades on a scale eg though they are considered tabloids, the DM, Express are aimed at middle class/upper classes and are thus more erudite. The Sun, Mirror, news of the world are aimed at working class people. More visual, less talking though they hire quite erudite female columnists juxtaposed with page 3 pictorials. These tabloids are fantastic at memes and click baity headlines.

          The DM website is a different beast because it’s showbiz page is straight out of the pages of the sun/Mirror. Piers Morgan, it’s editor was the editor of the mirror for a decade, so he has brought that style to the website. The other pages are closer to the print editions of the paper.

          In terms of how public figures communicate with the public, yes. Our politicians and royals use the tabloids to communicate with the public. They don’t just collude in good coverage, but also write op-eds occassionally eg here is an op-ed David Cameron, then Prime Minister, wrote in the Mirror during 2016 Brexit Campain http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-writes-mirror-dont-7978638

          And so influential are they that their editors are actively courted by the establishment. As an example, the Sun is thought to be a very good barometer for political inffluence and once boasted of helping Thatcher into office and keeping her there. Every aspiring political figure made a point of courting Rupert Murdoch after that.

          Side note with apologies and no intention of derailing this discussion………

          Given Rupert Murdoch’s influence on the British political landscape, it had become a given that whichever politician he papstrolled with during an election campaign would end up winning the election because his media empire would influence the public to make it so. He did it every single time with British party leaders.

          So when he did a pap stroll with Trump in June 2016, i knew Trump was going to win. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3660027/Look-s-coming-dinner-Trump-dines-Rupert-Murdoch-wife-Jerry-Hall-posh-Scottish-golf-course-meal-s-house-Donald-owns-place.html

          Now you could say it was a coincidence, but it has been the case every election cycle in Britain and politicians publicly worry about his support when election cycle is coming up.

          Tony Blair once flew to Australia for an hour to secure his backing and the Sun switched support from the Conservatives to Labour and viola!! The rest is history.

          The differende in American tabloid culture vs British can be seen in your comparison of US weekly to the DM. The better comparison is grazia magazine or hello magazine. Purely entertainment with no influence.

          It’s difficult to appreciate the distinction becauee American tabloids are things like the national enquirer or the globe which are rightly derided, but we do not have those types of tabloids here. I remain perplexed at the existance of the globe. At least the enquirer occassionally posts a true story from time to time, but Aliens?!?! Go figure.

          Our understanding of what constitutes a tabloid is thus different.

          • Carter
            February 3, 2017 at 9:53 pm (2 months ago)

            Wow thank you for such a thorough explanation! This makes a lot more sense. Tabloids in America are fluff celebrity news. No one would say they get any serious news from tabloids in the US, and no one would even suggest tabloids would influence an election.

            This entire time I really couldn’t understand why the royals put so much stock in tabloids thinking they were trying to court favor with the equivalents of Us weekly or People magazine. How come when the royals try to court US media they go for the fluff stuff? For example Prince Harry gave an interview to People magazine in the lead up to Invictus in Orlando and not say the New York Times.

          • Jen
            February 4, 2017 at 1:28 am (2 months ago)

            Carter, Murdoch has also influenced Australian elections via his conservative papers, broadsheet, The Australian and tabloid, the Daily Telegraph, and of course other media interests. Sadly, whomever he backs will win. He’s 85 and one can only hope… however his mother (an incredibly altruistic woman) lasted till she was 101.

        • JET Texas
          February 3, 2017 at 11:52 pm (2 months ago)

          Carter, you may know this, but ‘tabloid’ refers to the size/dimensions of the newspaper. British newspapers are mostly tabloid size, while US newspapers are mostly broadsheet size (like The New York Times). We have tabloid size publications in the US, but they are mostly entertainment/junk rags (The Enquirer, The Globe, the ones you see in the check-out lanes at grocery stores) and hence the term ‘tabloid journalism’, giving tabloid sized publications a bad image to many Americans.

          • Herazeus
            February 4, 2017 at 8:20 am (2 months ago)

            Carter: i think the royals have judged that they will reach a broader audience if they court people magazine which is a better grade of tabloid than the globe and available to regular people nationally as opposed to courting the new york times which may not reach or appeal a national audience.

      • Fifi
        February 3, 2017 at 1:51 pm (2 months ago)

        I agree; trying to tamp down a more charismatic couple won’t cut it.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 3, 2017 at 9:56 pm (2 months ago)

      I’m more curious if they would continue to call her Meghan as that’s what she’s been branded as for so many years or would they call her Rachel which is her real first name (Meghan is her middle name). They call Harry “Harry” even though his real first name is “Henry”, but Kate was branded as “Kate” for almost a decade yet they called her “Catherine”. Would Meghan want to continue the “Meghan” brand, or would she want to create a new “Rachel” brand to go with her new life/job/title? I could see it going either way.

      • notasugarhere
        February 4, 2017 at 9:30 am (2 months ago)

        Harry has always been Harry. At birth, his legal name “Henry” and that he’d be called by the nickname “Harry” was announced.

        Does anyone know if her family calls her Rachel or Meghan? It could be “Rachel” was chosen for family or religious reasons, but she’s always been called Meghan. I have a male colleague with the legal first name Mary (devout Catholic parents) but he publicly goes by his middle name.

        If this moves forward and she becomes a working royal? They might list her full name (Rachel Meghan) in a biography on the website, but they’d state that she goes by Meghan.

        It could also depend on what Harry calls her. If he refers to her as Rachel publicly, indicating that’s the name she uses in her personal-not-actress life, that could change things.

        • Carter
          February 4, 2017 at 10:06 am (2 months ago)

          If I had to guess I’d guess she goes by Meghan. The family that talk about her to the press haven’t talked to her in years and they refer to her as “Meg” which makes me think that’s what they called her. Also in Harry’s statement he officially referred to her as Meghan and not Rachel which makes me think that’s what he will call her officially. Then again I could be totally wrong!

  13. Kimothy
    February 3, 2017 at 10:11 am (2 months ago)

    I just realized you categorized this as “Annoying Articles” hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Interestingly, just when someone commented how there has been slim-to-none regarding Harry and Meghan, boom! We got an exclusive from The Sun (of all publications) of them out on a date.

    I think the reasons so much has died down in the past couple of months are because, IMO, sooo many disliked the tone of the statement that Harry released, so many dislike *her* because she’s biracial (speaking from 37 years experience, there are pluses and negatives growing up exposed to two different cultures but that’s another story) and/or a divorcee, she was suddenly papped everywhere and, some of her posts on Instagram (plus, some of the things she’d have with her) were very much strategic and planed out.

    • Jen
      February 3, 2017 at 10:29 am (2 months ago)

      I wonder if The Sun was chosen because the Daily Mail is known to be a pro-Middleton stronghold?

      • Mrs BBV
        February 3, 2017 at 10:55 am (2 months ago)

        I expect so. It’s definitely not a purely by chance encounter. I think the ground work is being laid. It was really odd looking at the photos because when he stands back to let Megan get into the car before him all I could think was William would have never done that for Kate. Hell he couldn’t even remember she was there with him at one engagement. And on the barge at Queen’s jubilee he walked off with an umbrella protecting his bald spot and had to be called back by Harry to do the chilarous thing and cover Kate.

        • Funsuntravel
          February 3, 2017 at 11:33 am (2 months ago)

          That bald spot line killed me lol lol @mrsbbv

        • Kimothy
          February 3, 2017 at 12:13 pm (2 months ago)

          Mrs BBV: that reminds me of when Kate was quite pregnant with Charlotte and they were at some church gathering as a family (I forget what it was) and afterwards, they were going down the stairs. William was a step or two ahead of Kate and Kate was wearing high heels, very pregnant and he didn’t bother to hold her hand to help her down!! I was stunned that he could be that rude and flippant in public and if I remember correctly, a lot of people noticed that moment.

          • Herazeus
            February 3, 2017 at 1:06 pm (2 months ago)

            As i’ve said in previous posts, my negative view of WK started quite early, but in terms of William being inconsiderate of Kate, again…..saw it on their wedding day when he didn’t help her into or out of the carriage.

            She struggled to enter the carriage in all her finery without a helping hand and when she exited at BP, Harry came rushing from the carriage behind to help her with her dress.

            …..but i think the worst was Canada when William exited the carriage and walked straight ahead to greet the waiting dignitaries as Kate struggled to exit the carriage.

            On all occassions, he never looks back to see where she is and he never slows his step.

            At his RAF passing out ceremony, they were filmed walking away to go to another location and she’s walking so fast to keep up that she looks like she’s about to break into a ran. At the time i overlooked it by thinking they were late hence tge speed and his lack of consideration, but after the engagement, i’ve re-evaluated my view of it.

          • Sarah
            February 3, 2017 at 1:30 pm (2 months ago)

            I’ve seen comments deriding her long stride. I think she does that to try and keep up with William.
            My sister is almost 6 ft and I’m almost 5’4. I always lengthen my stride when we’re together and she tries to shorten hers. The fact that he’s not even cognizant or doesn’t care of the discrepancy always spoke volumes to me.
            And don’t forget when outside greeting the Obama’s and it was raining. It was POTUS who offered her shelter under his…

          • Nic919
            February 3, 2017 at 10:17 pm (2 months ago)

            I am no fan of Kate, but Will is horrible when it comes to etiquette with her. He never pays attention to her and is very similar to Trump when it comes to things like that. He doesn’t seem to care about her very much. Body language speaks volumes about that relationship.

  14. Angel
    February 3, 2017 at 10:20 am (2 months ago)

    I don’t like or dislike then at this point but I do hope she is very mindful of all that moving to a new country and culture entails (if they marry). It’s all very ‘love actually’ to date a prince and pop out for movie dates but America and Britain are very different placesv and visiting is not living and living is not working for a nation that you have not grown up in.

    • GreenTrees
      February 3, 2017 at 11:39 am (2 months ago)

      “Visiting is not living and living is not working for a nation you have not grown up in.”

      So. Well. Said.

      • Angel
        February 3, 2017 at 12:46 pm (2 months ago)

        *blushes*

    • Birdy
      February 4, 2017 at 3:41 am (2 months ago)

      Oh come on loads of people cross the Pond both ways and are very happy. And having lived in Toronto she’ll even be used to the weather. Other royals have made far bigger changes…Max, Mary and Charlene spring to mind, even having to learn a new language.

  15. Lobbit
    February 3, 2017 at 10:40 am (2 months ago)

    They look great together! And that hand holding definitely makes a statement, doesn’t it? Wishing them the best.

  16. BostonBrahmin
    February 3, 2017 at 11:51 am (2 months ago)

    My feelings about Harry have changed because I bought into the hype that he was a more down to earth royal, but when he published that long winded statement about Meghan, which could have been done in 5 sentences, I began to feel that he was just whiny and playing his privileged royal card. Despite that, he still does so much better than his brother when out on engagements, because I do think he is interested and informed and just has a different personality. I have no problem with the outfits Harry and Meghan wearing on this date, it reminds me of celebs you see out in Hollywood, they go to the trendiest places and are dressed down in their trendy “casual” look. You could reproduce their looks by shopping in Marshalls, but I am pretty sure neither Harry or Meghan do that. If they do get married, I am not sure it will last, Meghan went with her ex-husband for 7 years I think and then they got married and were divorced in 2 years. I just find that odd, that 2 people who knew each other for that length of time and were together could not stay married. I think she will not be able to handle being a royal wife and will feel stifled. Then again, they could prove me wrong….

    • notasugarhere
      February 3, 2017 at 11:58 am (2 months ago)

      I hope they are dressing for themselves on their personal time and not for what we think of their outfits.

      Harry needs to follow his father’s lead on PR, not Jason’s. Getting married, having kids, and seriously upping his work game would be in his favor. Plan for the post-royal future for himself and any kids, because Harry&Spouse will age out of favor once G&C are work-age.

      Letizia was with her ex for a decade, 1 year marriage followed. She and Felipe are 12+ years into their marriage.

    • Herazeus
      February 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm (2 months ago)

      I blame Jason for that statement. For someone who has worked PR all his life, he sure doesn’t know how to write a concise statement that isn’t emotive.

      This statement was his third such ‘leave them alone’ statements – the other 2 were written for William.

      All were overly long, overly emotive and overly verbose, and all angered the press and the public alike.

      That’s not to say that Harry and William had no hang in them or didn’t pressure him into writing them, but his idea of a public statement is completely wrong for the British public. His writing style works wonders in America, but we are stiff upper lipped Brits. We don’t do emotive, verbose and tears in public. Exception Diana’s funeral. He could have written a short, concise statement without going as far as he did.

      • Carter
        February 3, 2017 at 12:41 pm (2 months ago)

        Jason is only as good as the people he works for. Harry and William both read the statements before they were released I’m sure. If they had a problem with their wording, they would have made Jason rewrite them to be less over the top.

        • Jen
          February 3, 2017 at 1:05 pm (2 months ago)

          Agree. You can advise, but if the principal has made up his mind, that’s the way it’s going to be. Both princes have been used to calling the shots all their lives and are not known to heed advice. I have no trouble imagining Harry insisting on the language and length simply because it was so hot-headed and personal. It didn’t have the dispassionate voice of a professional.

          • notasugarhere
            February 3, 2017 at 1:17 pm (2 months ago)

            Jason isn’t a professional, he’s a hack.

        • Herazeus
          February 3, 2017 at 1:20 pm (2 months ago)

          When JLP worked for them, their personal lives were handled differently. No verbally emotive statements, but the princes’ distress would be made clear via sanctioned articles eg

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1539043/Stop-harassing-Kate-pleads-William.html

          A discreetly sanctioned article with only one attributable quote from the Palace.

          This article’s sentiments were widely circulated and it made news headlines around the world including lead item for that day’s tv news.

          Kate was also allowed to use *royal lawyers to write to various news editors to back off.

          *same law firm as the one that represents the royals thus giving her letters veneer of a royal sanction.

      • Sunfuntravel
        February 3, 2017 at 3:55 pm (2 months ago)

        Anger the public?.. did I miss the scientific poll? Such a strong statement is base on what? I could make an equally strong statement that the public loved it… this would be base on the fact t that I was the only one from my group of friends that thought the statement was immature, they thought it was sweet!

        • Nic919
          February 3, 2017 at 10:20 pm (2 months ago)

          Lainey calls it the Love Shield… so I don’t think it’s fair to say everyone took that statement negatively. I didn’t either. I thought that the press went crazy and racist very quickly and needed to back down.

      • Lizzie
        February 4, 2017 at 10:07 pm (2 months ago)

        Re: Jason Knauf: He might be American by birth but I rather get the impression that he disdains the US. If he should see your comment on his writing, I believe that he would be more insulted that you think it is American in style rather than its being too wordy or emotional!

  17. MavenTheFirst
    February 3, 2017 at 12:37 pm (2 months ago)

    1. They lost me at “she cooks for him”. Is it a requirement to be the little woman to snag a prince?

    2. From all reports of her shallowness he picked someone on his level. I doubt they are discussing the meaning of life. I wonder if she’ll take up the slaughter of defenceless animals and birds as any little woman would do.

    3. I do believe that Harry has baby fever.

    4. And yeah, “that’s some bad hat, Harry”.

    These comments are coming from someone who is Meghan neutral (because I still don’t care).

    • Elaine
      February 3, 2017 at 3:23 pm (2 months ago)

      politely disagree with the characterization of a woman who cooks as a “little woman”. Some of us enjoy cooking. Nothing ‘little’ about it 😉

      am so on board for this wedding.
      less happy about the near 24/7 promotion of soho house. Geez Megs, get a new hangout. Seriously everything in her life seems to be about soho house soho schmouse, Where? Soho house dahling…

      Still love Princess Sparkles, but with a bit of side-eye.

    • Marion Cole
      February 3, 2017 at 4:02 pm (2 months ago)

      I see nothing wrong with the “she cooks for him” comment. She probably enjoys cooking, and Harry enjoys the results! If you are photographed every time you step out the door, I can imagine cooking and eating at home is very appealing and the only guarantee of a private evening. As for Harry’s hat, wearing a beanie type of hat is a popular trend right now as well as keeping warm and being a little less recognizable. I think Meagan looks and sounds like a lovely lady. I hope this relationship develops and they are both happy for a long time to come. And I hope the press leaves them alone so that it can develop. So Meagan, keep on cooking at home for Harry!

      • MavenTheFirst
        February 3, 2017 at 7:01 pm (2 months ago)

        It’s not that she enjoys cooking. It’s that this is publicised in terms of Meghan catering to her man, the little woman making the nest. Meanwhile, where is Harry and his cooking for her? Well we know the little prince has been catered to his entire life. And it’s not like he’s making an effort in that direction because we’re not hearing that.

        I don’t think either Kate or Meghan should be scoring points for cooking for their man. Nor should this be an indicator of intimacy from the tabloids. It’s the stereotype that I object to.

        • MavenTheFirst
          February 3, 2017 at 7:27 pm (2 months ago)

          Forgot one other point- men should grow up and learn to cook. It’s not rocket science.

        • Sarah
          February 3, 2017 at 8:57 pm (2 months ago)

          I agree, it’s the narrative that’s being told. They did the same with Kate. Kate loves to cook for the two of them, queue pictures of her buying groceries.
          Same thing with her, we already have the Whole Foods pics to go with it.
          I’m female and I don’t cook but I am great at the clean up afterwards to do my part and entertaining my nieces while the “grown ups” cook =)

          • MavenTheFirst
            February 4, 2017 at 1:17 am (2 months ago)

            Sarah,

            Ha! Even if you say you don’t cook I bet that in a pinch you cook better than Harry.

          • Laura
            February 5, 2017 at 1:24 pm (2 months ago)

            I hope I am becoming better at cooking. Even better at the washing up. However I look on cooking for guys as a bribe in some way. Yes a guy likes a girl who can cook but it feels like a trick. Sarah, I am the same. I love entertaining my nieces. I like saying phrases I was brought up with and playing with them at their pace.
            Harry should learn to cook.

        • katemiddletonreview
          February 3, 2017 at 9:21 pm (2 months ago)

          To add to the conversation: Unless someone’s always buying take-out or going out to eat, then someone’s got to cook. It’s not a big deal. But the PR of Meghan cooking for Harry being used to say that that’s a big indicator of how loved-up they are and how they’re totally ready for marriage is silly, in my opinion. Everyone’s got to eat, someone’s got to cook, so cooking for someone while in a relationship isn’t a big deal.

          • Sarah
            February 3, 2017 at 9:38 pm (2 months ago)

            So we can say his weight loss is not only to increase in cardiovascular exercise but also in part to part time vegan diet😉

          • Laura
            February 6, 2017 at 11:22 am (2 months ago)

            I agree that someone has to cook. I just think it is the motive behind it. I don’t know how it is in the US, but the schools here do food tech and I wish I had been better at it. I am only now confident to cope with basic cooking. I mean I could make an apple crumble and lasagne at school which I still make from scratch. It is just the planning bit that I need to get my head around. I am pleased that Harry is with Meghan whether it is casual or not. Its just some girls think if they cook for a guy they get something in exchange. Thinking if I do this, this and this they guy will like me. No one is worth selling themselves, like my grandmother tried to do. Which is why an uncle told me he was good at the washing up. Which I aim to be too.

  18. jenny
    February 3, 2017 at 1:08 pm (2 months ago)

    I don’t know what to think about her. At first, I was impressed. Now, not so much. I believe she’s an actress and that helps her deal with the media. She knows how to play them well, so far.! She also seems to match Harry in many ways, but when a super star like Harry marries (yes, he is a Royal, but he has that Diana quality, too), there’s only room for one such star in a relationship, I think.

    With, Meghan/Rachel, there would be two. At first, they might be able to deal with it, but I think it would be very rare for it to last, unless she took a back seat, more often. I say, “she” because his Royal background would make it almost impossible for him to do so. Especially, since he really has charisma. I wish them well.

    If they are happy, then good for them All the sickening little articles are annoying, though.

    I have to be honest, I was surprised to see her with her head down in some of the photos. Since when has she avoided media? I guess the reality of the hunt being so vigorous set in. Or, perhaps, she was trying to make Harry feel as if she is more demure than she is? I hate to be jaded, but that keeps coming through to me.

    • notasugarhere
      February 3, 2017 at 1:19 pm (2 months ago)

      Or maybe she’s trying not to be blinded by all of the flashbulbs? You can see the contrast between how dark it was and how lit-up the people in the photo are. Those were some seriously bright flashes.

    • Lobbit
      February 3, 2017 at 1:44 pm (2 months ago)

      She’s an actress and a true extrovert that enjoys engaging the public – I’m sure Harry knows (and maybe even appreciates it) so I doubt the camera shyness is about impressing him. I’d say that she’s been made to understand that a “demure” pose is what this situation demands – what the public wants from someone dating a member of the BRF. She’s a smart girl and quick study – yet another reason why she’s a good fit for Harry imo.

      • MavenTheFirst
        February 4, 2017 at 4:23 pm (2 months ago)

        I would agree. She’s an actress. Playing a role is her bread and butter.

        After reading all these comments back and forth, it makes me wonder what people think comprises the perfect person for Harry because Meghan sounds pretty good to me. Am I missing something?

        My only investment in this is that I want another opulent royal wedding to watch and drool over. I want tons of bling too. Ha!

        • notasugarhere
          February 5, 2017 at 12:58 pm (2 months ago)

          If only the BRF did tiara-filled weddings. Unfortunately they pick daytime events, or with Edward and Sophie, a later afternoon with the requirement of no hats (and no tiaras).

    • Fifi
      February 3, 2017 at 2:03 pm (2 months ago)

      Let’s face it, there is always more interest in the princess than the prince. Part of it is Cinderella fantasy fulfillment, and part is fashion interest when there’s not much substance in any royal engagement. All of them, H&M and W&K, are hitting middle age, the time when royals become less interesting and popular, so they all better be prepared. And royal children will only be bit part cuties for quite some time. The BRF publicity machine has its work cut out for it.

      • jenny
        February 3, 2017 at 2:10 pm (2 months ago)

        There may ber more interest in the princess than the prince and Harry is approaching a more mature age, but I don’t think someone with his charisma is going to take a back seat for too long. I do think that he is smitten now and hopefully, it is love!
        But, to be honest, I think Meghan has her work cut out for her. Making him feel special and allwoing herself the spotlight, too, You can do that for only so long, when it’s the spotlight for yourself that you really want. And, that is how I think of her. I see her as looking out for herself as number one. As I said before, perhaps, I am reading her incorrectly. But, I think like Kate, she will do anything to land her prince. Then, once the ring is on, the real person comes out.

        Just not a huge fan of hers. But, maybe, she will prove me wrong.

  19. Indiana Joanna
    February 3, 2017 at 1:13 pm (2 months ago)

    Although I find Meghan annoying given her blog, silly aphorisms, and self promotion, I’m enjoying the possibility that super mum Carole is none too happy with this development. After all, Carole didn’t devote decades to groom her daughters to mingle with some rank Yank. Also, Meghan achieved her golden girlfriend status (possibly duchess status) without a scheming mommy dearest, loads of money, or a family aristo pedigree. Carole’s ongoing desperate efforts to promote Pips’ upcoming wedding are being sidelined by the Harry/Meghan romance. Hahahahahaha.

    • Jen
      February 3, 2017 at 1:36 pm (2 months ago)

      Yes, on all counts. Oh dear, Carole will not be happy with anything deflecting from her daughters. It will be interesting to see her manoeuvres play out via the DM.

      • notasugarhere
        February 3, 2017 at 1:44 pm (2 months ago)

        I think Carole would be happy with anything that distracts from the France trial in May. She’d prefer it was Pippa, but she’ll happily take anti-Markle Middleton-sanctioned articles instead.

        • Jen
          February 3, 2017 at 2:07 pm (2 months ago)

          Oh, I doubt anything would deflect from the France trial; royal nudity is too juicy to pass up as far as the press is concerned. If the Sun is to get the ‘exclusives’ on Harry-Meghan as appears to be the plan, Carole won’t be able to influence what is printed from that source at least.

    • Carter
      February 3, 2017 at 2:05 pm (2 months ago)

      Why do people think Carole cares so much? She has what she wants: status. She’s the mother to the future queen consort and grandmother to the future king. Even if Meghan takes all the attention off of every member of the BRF it doesn’t change the fact that Kate and her children are the future of the BRF.

      • Jen
        February 3, 2017 at 2:25 pm (2 months ago)

        I’d agree with that take had Carole et al stopped pursuing press attention after the wedding. But that never happened; the family has been relentless in its pursuit of maintaining public attention and seeking celebrity status for themselves in their own right (Mike excepted). Additionally, the Middleton women are competitive where other females are concerned; it seems their default position. While Kate has the upper hand in being, maybe, the Queen Consort one day, she will inevitably be compared to whoever Harry marries. If that’s Meghan, the contrasts are stark in terms of employment and ease of communication. Plus comparisons about looks and dress would factor too. My observation is that the Middleton’s have made a substantial investment in seeing the daughters not only marry well but are seen as top of the tree.

        • Indiana Joanna
          February 3, 2017 at 2:48 pm (2 months ago)

          +1

          Carole has lived her entire life questing for royal status. She was able to achieve some of that through her daughter but doesn’t have her own royal status which she believes is her due. Hence the continued stories about how she raises the Camb kids, how she and KM grew the Party Pieces business (and leaves out any mention of Mike on the website), and how she runs W’s household. This is all done so she will get the title she thinks she deserves. She is delusional. Her children are are merely surrogates for her own ambition.

    • Elaine
      February 3, 2017 at 3:31 pm (2 months ago)

      Yup, Megs is a climber. And I like her!

      Not sure whose University-level class in ‘Gold Diggin’ to attend…

      Momzilla from a London council house, steering her emotionally vapid daughter to Queen-hood and Buck house?

      Or the bi-racial American beauty with an education but NO money, NO contacts, and a (middling) acting ability who may be the next HRH of England, UK and the Commonwealth?

      Hmmm.
      I call:
      Megs for the MA in ‘Gold and Prince Ginger Mountain scaling’.

      Carole for the PhD in ‘Diamond tiara excavation’.

      Sorry, HRH or not, even in Vegas ‘Queen’ tops ‘Duchess’ 😉

      • GeorgiaW
        February 3, 2017 at 6:06 pm (2 months ago)

        So confused by backhanded compliments like this. Is every woman who dates a member of royalty automatically a gold-digger if she is not independently wealthy?

        What evidence is there that Meghan went after Harry? Not being argumentative just asking. Every version of the story that I’ve seen is that they met and he pursued her. That seems to be his standard M.O. with women from gossip spilt over the years.

        All of his actions thus far seem to indicate that he is the one doing everything he can to keep this relationship going so I am confused by the comments expressing that Meghan has set out to purposefully trap him.

        • Elaine
          February 3, 2017 at 6:39 pm (2 months ago)

          @GeorgiaW, if you are responding to my comment I will respond to yours (which may have been in response to mine 😉 )

          I do think she is a climber. She seems to have a particular ability to cultivate friendships with the powerful (Sophie Trudeau and husband, Piers Morgan etc). This is a talent and nothing to be ashamed of. This world is constructed along the lines of who you know. Meghan appears to make sure she knows the ‘right’ people. Those who can give her publicity to help further her acting career. Actors need publicity. Its the name of the game. ‘Show’ business, after all.

          Her focus may be different now that she is in love with Harry.

          I do not judge her from moving from a childhood without a lot of money, into a milieu with more. She used her talents, her gifts, her abilities to do so.

          I do not judge her and I do not dislike her. I share her origins, so do nor fault her for them, nor for rising beyond them. Go Megs!

          The rest of my post was a joke. I do not think she is a Gold Digger. She may enjoy wealth, but she needn’t marry Harry to have this. It seems she met and feel in love with a Ginger Prince. Props to her.

          So let me be the first to say:
          -There is no University course in Gold Digging.
          -And neither Carole Middleton nor Meghan Markle are lecturers in any course at this non-existent University (of which I am aware).

          • GeorgiaW
            February 3, 2017 at 8:14 pm (2 months ago)

            Thanks for your courteous reply. I do agree with you that she seems to have a very influential circle of friends and acquaintances for someone from humble beginnings. Your point is well taken and I actually think makes sense.

            I did know that you were, of course, joking about the courses. 🙂

            Thanks again.

      • Nic919
        February 3, 2017 at 11:35 pm (2 months ago)

        Everyone assumes that Will and Kate will never get divorced. Sure Kate is unlikely to want one, but Will may divorce her because he doesn’t seem interested in her most of the time and she and the other Middletons may be viewed as liabilities. Already Kate gets blamed for the laziness more than he does so I can easily see him throwing her out to the wolves if it is required to preserve his position.

  20. Barbara
    February 3, 2017 at 4:12 pm (2 months ago)

    I’m not sure why there are so many complaints about her. She has the look, she already does charity work, she seems to be nice from what I have seen and read and Harry appears to be in love, which is all that really matters. I hope they get engaged soon. There is so much negativity in the US right now we could use some fun news to follow.

    • Marion Cole
      February 3, 2017 at 6:03 pm (2 months ago)

      Couldn’t agree more! All that really matters is what Harry thinks! And if Harry thinks she is the one, the rest of the world should let them get on with it!

  21. Lauri from Ca
    February 3, 2017 at 6:31 pm (2 months ago)

    I just wanted to say Thanks KMR for writing this post. I appreciate that Harry and Meghan aren’t your favorite royal couple but the fact that you wrote this piece to satisfy the little community you have created speaks volumes to me as to what a caring and thoughtful person you truly are. As I have said before, you spoil us and please don’t stop 🙂

    Ps- please excuse the awkward writing, misspelled words and/or poor grammar my laptop died and I am using my phone whose type is so small I can barely make it out.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 3, 2017 at 9:23 pm (2 months ago)

      Thanks Lauri. 🙂

  22. Elaine
    February 3, 2017 at 7:51 pm (2 months ago)

    At first I didn’t like this outfit at all. Like, why isn’t she wearing a cute top for an evening dinner??

    But on closer inspection -I think Meghan is wearing HARRY’S shirt!

    How se*y is that?! Going out for dinner, wearing an outfit only he understands, an intimate secret between the two of you.
    Awww…
    #LuvRox

  23. Red Tulip
    February 3, 2017 at 9:25 pm (2 months ago)

    If those two we are happy and in love 😍 then all the power to them. They aren’t harming anyone or Meghan doesn’t seem To come with a lot of negative baggage.

  24. Reba
    February 3, 2017 at 11:41 pm (2 months ago)

    Duchess Rachael (or Meghan)? No. She would be referred to as HRH Meghan, The Duchess of Whatever. But let’s be real, the press and public would still call her Meghan Markle, just like HRH Catherine, The Duchess of Cambridge is still Kate Middleton. “Duchess Kate” is not a proper address, and no one seriously uses it.

    And I don’t see anything wrong with the name Rachael or Meghan. It’s no more low-rent than Savannah or Autumn or Mia.

    As for my thoughts on the relationship, I don’t think it will be boring to blog about. So there’s that. As for the suitability of the match, poor boy is running out of options, especially considering how badly he wants children. The saying “beggars can’t be choosers” is coming to mind.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 3, 2017 at 11:57 pm (2 months ago)

      If we want to get technical, then of course if Meghan were to marry Harry her name would completely disappear and she would officially be known as HRH The Duchess of X, or Princess Henry. And yeah, Meghan will most likely still be referred to by Meghan Markle because of the previous branding thing. But I’m a bit confused because I understand why saying “Duchess Meghan” is such a big problem or somehow means I don’t understand how titles or previous name branding works.

      Also, who said there was something wrong with either the names Meghan or Rachel?

    • EL
      February 4, 2017 at 1:15 am (2 months ago)

      Actually she would be HRH The duchess of whatever. Since she is not royal-born, she pretty much loses her names after marriage. Only born-royals can have their name appear after the HRH and before the dukedom/earldom title.

      Oops didn’t see you had already responded KMR.

      • MavenTheFirst
        February 4, 2017 at 1:25 am (2 months ago)

        It’s like you get erased. Creepy.

        • Em
          February 4, 2017 at 5:09 am (2 months ago)

          Erased and molded into a seemingly “perfect stepford wife. Super creepy!

    • Herazeus
      February 4, 2017 at 8:29 am (2 months ago)

      Reba: Further to KMR and Em’s comments, there is no comma in a married title. Adding it to the title renders the title holder a divorcee. Thus your writing HRH Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge is saying that HRH apart, Kate and william are divorced.

      Married women = HRH The Title X

      Divorced women = First name, title x

      You’ve written Kate’s title as if she is a divorced woman.

      Maven: yep….you are erased. No first name for you going forward until you are divorced. Even widowhood doesn’t return your first name to you. Instead you add ‘dowager’ to your title which has all the appeal of mouldy fruit left on a shelf.

      • Fifi
        February 4, 2017 at 9:11 am (2 months ago)

        +1 on the dowager. Glad the Queen Mother dodged that bullet.

        • Herazeus
          February 4, 2017 at 10:13 am (2 months ago)

          The Queen mum refused to be called that and lobbied to be called ‘Queen Mother’officially. Rather than be called HM Dowager Queen Elizabeth, she lobbied to be officially called HM Queen Elizabeth Queen Mother.

  25. Ardis
    February 4, 2017 at 1:20 am (2 months ago)

    Wow, Kate Middleton Review, why are you so negative toward Meghan? What has she ever done to you? You sound like you hate her. I like her. Sure the Tig is derivative, but honestly, Meghan is smart, much more so than Kate, gracious and a hard worker. I believe she will be a great addition to the Royal Family. Why don’t you give her a chance instead of such nasty bias?

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 4, 2017 at 1:25 am (2 months ago)

      The Kate fans would and have said the same thing to me about Kate. I’ve been much harsher on Kate than I was on Meghan here. Do you think I have a “nasty bias” against Kate?

      There have been several comments like yours about my article, but I honestly don’t understand why Kate is fair game but Meghan is off limits.

      • Birdy
        February 4, 2017 at 5:00 am (2 months ago)

        From my perspective it’s because you and many others do not appear to me to have given her a chance. From the start she’s been slated. I know it’s not a racist thing and I’m not suggesting it is.
        Kate had so many chances and still in January every year we all hope for a better year and a step up. Even though there is so much evidence to the contrary. We still try to give her the benefit of the doubt.
        Meghan seems to have been written off for various reasons, she’s an actress, she American, she has dodgy family members (don’t we all??!!), she uses Social Media, her charity work is not genuine. My personal view is give her a break, let’s see what happens. She clear.y makes Harry happy, and a happy marriage may well be a good foundation for him to step up and work more.
        Meghan just doesn’t seem to be being given the benefit of the doubt on anything but is written off as unsuitable from the start.

        As I say, that’s my opinion.

        • katemiddletonreview
          February 4, 2017 at 5:18 am (2 months ago)

          From the start, I’ve been “Alright, whatever” about Meghan. This article is the first one where I’ve been outright negative about anything about her by saying I dislike her casual style and that her Tig Talk series is shallow and boring (although I did call one of her Instagrams “trolling” in a previous article). I don’t understand why waiting three months to talk about her casual style, which I’ve now seen a lot of in pap photos, and why saying her Tig Talk series, not even the entire blog just one small part of it, is shallow and boring is ‘not giving her a chance’. As far as I am aware, other than to call out her family members and that one Instagram post, I haven’t mentioned any of the things you claim I’ve written Meghan off for. I haven’t written Meghan off, I just think the Tig Talk series is terrible. If we’re talking about what Meghan will be like as a Duchess, I think she’d probably be pretty good at it, although I don’t think that she will outwork Kate (and I don’t think Harry will show off his kids more than William does). If Meghan and Harry get engaged, then I will of course hope for the best as I did with Sofia and as I do with Kate every year. But hoping that Meghan will be a good Duchess is not going to stop me from talking about the things I dislike, like her Tig Talk series and her casual style.

          • Birdy
            February 4, 2017 at 6:13 am (2 months ago)

            I wrote you and many others….someone today has said she won’t be able to make the switch to living in the U.K. My comments were more general than focussed on you specifically.

          • SpringsMom
            February 5, 2017 at 12:51 am (2 months ago)

            Well I for one, am happy that there is another “annoying articles” by KMR! I also do not agree that she picked anyone apart. There was an article that was published and she commented on what was in the article.
            I have been a little irritated that they played a cat and mouse game with the press regarding their relationship and then got upset when it got out…yet, they were the one’s that were leaving clues everywhere.
            I think that Harry pursued her. She did set herself up to be a good catch by doing her volunteer work in Africa, but I wonder if he didn’t notice everything she was doing couples with being beautiful and said to himself that he wanted to meet her.
            I’m not a fan of her personal style although I did like her booties. Unfortunately they’re a little out of my price range.
            I only hope that she is not using him to increase her profile. I noticed that Suits is being advertised during an Xfinity commercial regarding On Demand. But yes I would be very sad if this is what she was doing. I am skeptical of her, but only because of what we know of her blog and her interview at the UN.
            BTW before anyone says I’m racist, I’m most definitely not. We have a blended family beyond what most ever see and I love every minute of it. 🙂
            Keep up the good work KMR and thank you so much for the annoying articles! It brightens my day!!! 🙂

    • Jen
      February 4, 2017 at 5:03 am (2 months ago)

      As you say, The Tig is derivative. I’d guess it’s part of an overall strategy from her PR company for Meghan to be seen more multi-dimensionally: actress, lifestyle blogger, interested in social good, and so on. She has a career to maintain in a very competitive industry.

      But none of us are obliged to lap up anyone’s PR and if we choose not to, be intimidated into silence for fear of a tongue-lashing. My observation is that KMR has tread very carefully as far as Meghan Markle is concerned. She has rationally critiqued MM’s interview section in a cogent manner. She’s entitled to her opinion. I certainly wouldn’t equate it with ‘hate’.

      I wonder if part of the issue here with Harry-Meghan is that people have become jaded and weary of the PR con job done on them in regard to William and Kate? The couple has proved to have feet of clay despite every advantage and all manner of goodwill bestowed upon them. And the cynical response to Harry-Meghan is, “here we go again”. And they’d have a point given the juvenile nature of the PR thus far. It was a misstep for sure; further, it’s hard to be supportive with such nonsense playing out. Cynicism sets in because we’ve seen it all before: fool me once – it’s your fault; fool me twice – it’s my fault.

      All relationships – work, personal – are transactions. You can codify it but at essence, people have an agenda they want met, whatever it is. That’s no slur on Harry-Meghan; it applies to us all.

    • Carter
      February 4, 2017 at 6:17 am (2 months ago)

      KMR has been very polite about her opinion. Saying she finds her Tig Talk series boring is a valid criticism and opinion. Saying she doesn’t like her style is also a valid opinion. Given that both those things area readily available online and have been around for a while you don’t have to take a long time to form an opinion on them. She hasn’t said anything that she hasn’t also at some point said about any other royal woman. Also she has said that she thinks Meghan would probably do a good job at being a duchess. That to me isn’t a nasty bias.

    • notasugarhere
      February 4, 2017 at 9:44 am (2 months ago)

      There is plenty of “hate-Meghan Markle at any cost out there”, but this isn’t that place.

      This article didn’t strike me as anti-Meghan, merely as KMR stating her honest opinion of some of her work. She isn’t saying “Meghan is a terrible person and unsuitable to be royal”. She’s saying she personally thinks Meghan’s blog is boring and her street style isn’t to her liking.

      Why shouldn’t a blog writer be free to criticize someone else’s blog? Or a fashion fan be free to criticize a person’s fashion choices?

      • Em
        February 5, 2017 at 4:34 am (2 months ago)

        She didn’t even say that the blog itself was boring, but rather the Tig Talks.

  26. Ardis
    February 4, 2017 at 2:31 am (2 months ago)

    I am always a bit suspicious of people vehemently opposed to Meghan. They may have reasons against her that they don’t have against Kate. That is all I am going to say and for those reasons, I will always stick up for her.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 4, 2017 at 4:06 am (2 months ago)

      So no one can say anything negative about Meghan or else they’re racist? Even if they’ve said the same or even more negative things about Kate, Pippa, and Cressida?

      • Sunfuntravel
        February 4, 2017 at 7:50 pm (2 months ago)

        Perhaps a valid opinion is clumped up with some of the vitriol that’s been thrown at out there about Meghan ( not here but other places)… I don’t sense racism from you at all… I do sense an overall picking her apart, but the same is done with Kate… Me included PS.. I have said Kate I lazy, boring etc… but I don’t know her personally to say that… just based OMO

    • Jen
      February 4, 2017 at 5:20 am (2 months ago)

      Both Kate and Meghan have seriously-invested detractors and defenders. The extremity of both positions is a bit of a worry.

      • MavenTheFirst
        February 5, 2017 at 12:11 pm (2 months ago)

        Regarding the detractors, I beg to differ. Kate has earned the endless criticism in her behaviour. Not sure what Meghan has actually *done* in her behaviour to inspire such vitriol. But I guess I don’t go to sites where Kate or Meghan hate is epic, so I can’t totally disagree with you.

        I just realised I’m indifferent to whom Harry marries because he’s not much different from his bro. He is shallow and lazy too, so I’ve set the bar low for him after the ongoing Camb debacle. I do hope that by marrying someone with a work ethic, it inspires him to do more. But I’m not holding my breath. Let’s face it the princelings are not someone we would want our daughters to marry even if he is Prince Charming.

        • Jen
          February 5, 2017 at 1:53 pm (2 months ago)

          Maven, I think we are in agreement. The only knowledge I have of Kate/Meghan fanatics and detractors where they eat their own tails comes by way of commenters on this site who advise it’s scary in those domains. I have no interest in irrational debate so don’t go there.

          Kate has had 15 years to demonstrate her character, passions and work ethic; all we have is an empty vessel, at least in her public persona. I don’t have any observations about Meghan as a person because I’ve only seen the PR career strategy in action (actress/ occasional charity work/ blogger) which is her professional persona after all. What’s beyond that has yet to be revealed; I don’t know.

          Apart from the ‘love is blind’ trope, I fail to see how Harry would have anything in common with a driven woman with a well-developed work ethic and financial/ intellectual independence. And why would such a woman want him? And why on earth should she then have to gee up Harry to do more work ffs? What a burden such a man would be. He and his dolt of a brother have been the recipient of every advantage under the sun; isn’t that enough to get off their bums to warrant their publicly-funded lifestyle?

          • notasugarhere
            February 5, 2017 at 2:34 pm (2 months ago)

            He served in his country’s military for a decade and served well. He’s shown solid commitment to helping wounded veterans for several years. He started a charity at 19 that has grown and grown through the years. He stage-managed Invictus Games into an international sporting event (and admitted he stole it from the US). Even if many other people were involved, he was still the driving force that made those things happen.

            Why wouldn’t that type of man be interesting to a woman who is involved in charity work herself?

            What did Maxima, Letizia, Mathilde, Mary, Daniel, et. al. see in their spouses? They must have seen something the rest of us didn’t see, as they are involved in relationships with the person behind the title.

            I see nothing interesting or greatly admirable in Willem-Alexander, Philippe, or Fred myself. I admire Victoria because she overcame the eating disorder (likely caused by her sexist parents). Felipe, well he’s cute with the beard but he wasn’t setting the world on fire with work or charity work when Letizia met him.

          • Jen
            February 5, 2017 at 4:15 pm (2 months ago)

            I don’t buy into the argument that Harry is fully occupied with work. He left the army 1-2 years ago and has yet to replace it with another full-time commitment, or what passes as full-time in royal terms. I see this past year (or two) as largely an extended ‘gap’ period with a sprinkling of formal engagements, but not nearly enough given that he has no commitments. His numbers are low, even with his personal interests factored in; his charm provides a smokescreen to close scrutiny.

            Professional teams do the grunt work for Sentebale and Invictus with Harry as the public face. That’s fine. I don’t think he is idle, but as a fit, able 32-year old he is not pulling his weight in a family comprising mainly old age pensioners, nor does he justify extravagant public rewards. I’d assign that last comment to other ‘royals’ as well. If you set yourself up, as the Windsor’s do, as – literally – God’s gift, you’d better deliver and in spades. In a more questioning age, and one increasingly intolerant of inequity, the concept of ‘royalty’ will come under increasing pressure and scrutiny to justify itself.

            On another level I object to a woman being the one in a relationship to ‘inspire’ her partner into more work as was suggested in Maven’s comment, probably tongue-in-cheek. Harry is responsible for his own motivation in life. As I said, the Wales men have been given every advantage in life, and with approaching middle age, if they are not motivated by now, they never will be.

          • notasugarhere
            February 5, 2017 at 8:36 pm (2 months ago)

            I’m not saying he cannot do more. I’m saying, compared to what I’ve seen from the others in a long time of royal watching, he isn’t the worst of the bunch.

            Many of the royals I listed have improved in my eyes since their marriage. They have become more aware of the reality around them, improved their self-presentation and work. Felipe is much more self-assured, especially in giving speeches (likely due to Letizia’s professional influence). In W-A’s case, formerly known as drunk Prince Pils, his temper has greatly improved.

            That doesn’t mean their spouse’s role is to re-make them. It means that they’ve ended up with a partner who helps them become a better version of themselves. Hopefully their spouse has also become a better version of themselves through the relationship with their royal partner.

            Why shouldn’t Harry have that too?

          • Kip
            February 5, 2017 at 9:52 pm (2 months ago)

            Totally agree with you Jen. Harry is a very charming and convincing interview, but to some extent he is just telling people what they want to hear. His actions show that he is fine with minimal duties, maximum private time.
            Only a buffoon would publicly say that they can’t and won’t step up to support their ninety year old grandparents and elderly father.

            Will 2017 be the year that the trio realizes that the public and press are completely fed up with their choice to perform limited engagements and don’t buy the “focus on causes” pr glib? That is just a fancy way to disguise the younger royals’ general disinterest. Will they change their approach or continue to flounder?

          • Jen
            February 6, 2017 at 7:53 am (2 months ago)

            A not uncommon thread woven into the narrative re. Harry-Meghan is that she will help him step up to more work. That’s a huge burden for any woman to bear.

            Harry had ten years in the military, ten years of discipline. He is 32 years of age. If he wants something – and that includes wanting to work more – he gets it. There are no obstacles. His actions indicate a preference for, as Kip says, ‘minimal public duties and maximum private time’. I’m not convinced that Harry wants anything more.

          • notasugarhere
            February 6, 2017 at 11:26 am (2 months ago)

            There is an artificial obstacle/limit to his work. While not a popular opinion, I stick by the “because Diana told him so” argument. He was raised to support his brother, and overshadowing William work-wise isn’t going to happen. He knows his prickly, acting-out brother better than anyone, and he’s taken the brunt of William’s lashing out for years. Sentebale and Invictus are the solution to the artificial limit, because they don’t “count” officially.

            I’m not buying into the narrative that a woman is there to fix a man. Being in a relationship with a supportive partner who helps you continue to grow and be a better version of yourself? Suddenly this is a bad thing?

            As I wrote, I’ve seen an improvement in many of the born royals since their marriages to every day types. Many were in their thirties when those marriage happened.

            Why should Harry be excluded from that, or somehow only Harry and Meghan be criticized for the idea of it? Continue to grow, change, learn at any age – royals and their partners shouldn’t be excluded from that.

          • Jen
            February 6, 2017 at 12:41 pm (2 months ago)

            Nota, I hope anyone seeking a partner would find a genuinely supportive soulmate. Harry’s no exception there. But I suspect royals trade on their status far more than is healthy for their personal development, simply because they can. They are too used to having things provided on tap, limiting them as human beings and making them a potentially challenging partner. Just look at Charles, Andrew, Anne, William.

            I have difficulty with the Diana promise taken to mean doing less. Being supportive doesn’t have to mean that. Do you think the brothers have not discussed how much formal royal work they should, could, or are prepared to do? That they have not spoken about their aged grandparents’ workload, and when they are intending to step up? That they have not made an agreement to delay ‘duty’ for as long as possible with all manner of excuses? That’s what it looks like to my eyes.

            And a few weeks ago, William played that same ‘do less’ card with regard to his father; he didn’t want to outshine him, or such words, with more work. My immediate reaction was to recall the Harry excuse.

            To me, W+H had too much kid glove treatment after Diana’s death, which they exploited as boys, and still do as men.

  27. Sue
    February 4, 2017 at 6:23 pm (2 months ago)

    I don’t know if anyone else has thought of this and yes, I am very aware that I am jumping the gun with this comment. If Meghan and Harry do get married, there will be no big wedding in Westminster Abbey. Unless things have changed since Charles and Camilla got married, marriage in the Church of England is not possible for them since Meghan is divorced. The best they could do would be a civil ceremony with a church blessing like Charles and Camilla or they could marry in Scotland like Anne and Tim did. Either way, I don’t think we will “see” much of the wedding.

    • Sunfuntravel
      February 4, 2017 at 7:43 pm (2 months ago)

      If (big IF) they get married, I don’t think Harry would care, because he clearly knew that she was a divorce, and still pursued a relationship with her.

    • Ellie
      February 5, 2017 at 4:54 am (2 months ago)

      The Church of England is fine with divorces remarrying now; and Meghan’s first wedding, AFAIK, was not a religious ceremony so it wouldn’t even count were those church laws in place. They changed their stance on this some time before Charles married Camilla–in 2002. I believe the reason C&C did what they did was because they were still sensitive about the spectre of Diana and her fans. There will be a big Westminster Abbey wedding, most likely, if Harry marries.

    • Herazeus
      February 5, 2017 at 9:29 am (2 months ago)

      What Ellie said.

      The rules on divorcees marrying in church changed more than a decade ago. To a certain extent it falls on the discretion of the officiating vicar, but in the main it’s not a problem any more and divorced people get married in CoE churches all the time now.

    • notasugarhere
      February 5, 2017 at 1:10 pm (2 months ago)

      That is a popular theme running around the anti-Meghan posts everywhere. Popular and untrue. As others pointed out, they can marry in CoE with the permission of the minister. If Letizia (divorcee) can marry in a full Catholic mass in Spain, less conservative Britain would allow these two to marry in a big church wedding.

      The less any potential wedding costs the taxpayers, the better. Marry at Windsor and have the reception at Frogmore (like Edward&Sophie, Peter&Autumn).

      I’m pulling for Windsor, but I’d settle for St Martin in the Fields because it’d make posters on another site happy 🙂

      • Carter
        February 5, 2017 at 6:48 pm (2 months ago)

        I don’t know anything about if Meghan’s first marriage if it was civil only or if she also had a religious ceremony. I also know nothing about how the Church of England treats remarriage of divorced people. But equating the situation to Letizia’s marriage is silly because that is a completely different religion. Letizia was allowed to marry in the Catholic church only because her first marriage was a civil marriage only; thus in eyes of the Catholic church, she was never married. The Catholic church does not allow divorced people to remarry in the Catholic church if they had a religious ceremony. The only way to get remarried in the Catholic church if you are divorced is to get your first marriage annulled by the pope. It has nothing to do with how conservative Spain or the SRF is.

        • notasugarhere
          February 5, 2017 at 8:46 pm (2 months ago)

          FYI, I was raised Catholic. To me the comparison makes sense.

          Catholicism has long been considered far more conservative than CoE. Letizia’s first marriage was a civil marriage, and Letizia was not a confirmed Catholic until right before the marriage. Both of those things made the full Catholic mass far easier for a divorcee.

          MM’s first marriage was not a religious ceremony, nor is she a member of CoE that I know of. The objections the anti-Meghan crowd puts forward just aren’t valid objections, esp when comparing the strictness of the different churches.

          • katemiddletonreview
            February 5, 2017 at 8:50 pm (2 months ago)

            Why does no one seem to care that Letizia wasn’t confirmed Catholic until right before her marriage but people deride Kate for not being confirmed in the CoE until right before her marriage?

            I had no idea that Leti wasn’t confirmed until right before marriage until you just mentioned it because I’ve never seen anyone mention it before, but I’ve seen so many people deride Kate for not being confirmed until right before her marriage.

          • Carter
            February 5, 2017 at 9:36 pm (2 months ago)

            Those things didn’t make it far easier for her to have a full Catholic mass, since she was never married in the Catholic church, she was always entitled to have a full Catholic mass and marriage ceremony. You don’t even need to be confirmed to get married in the Catholic church, it’s just strongly encouraged. I got married in the Catholic church and all I had to provide was my baptismal information.

            Back to Harry and Meghan, I doubt they would have trouble getting married in the Church of England especially if Meghan’s first marriage was just a civil marriage.

          • notasugarhere
            February 6, 2017 at 11:35 am (2 months ago)

            KMR, I’m sure there were plenty of people who did criticize her for it. While Spain is often considered a firmly Catholic country, only 1/3 of the people are acting Catholics. Many probably do what she did – you are baptized and only go back to the Church for big events like weddings or baptisms. Do the adult education program, be confirmed right before the wedding.

            As she was marrying into the royal family, one considered to be an example of upstanding Catholicism (stay in a miserable marriage because the Church said so)? Her being confirmed into Catholicism was probably seen as necessary by some. She wasn’t a popular choice to many, the divorce added to that. If she hadn’t been confirmed, it would have been used as another way to criticize her. Even if she could marry under Catholic rules without being confirmed, taking that extra step probably calmed some criticism about her first marriage.

  28. Halia
    February 4, 2017 at 7:58 pm (2 months ago)

    Poor P. Andrew, was pressured to end a relationship with an actress & harry not being pressured to end it with meghan? This is not fair!

    • Ellie
      February 4, 2017 at 10:04 pm (2 months ago)

      Well, Andrew’s girlfriend was a soft core porn star and it was the 70s/80s after all. Far less accepting for the royals to date someone like that. Probably wouldn’t be acceptable now, either, really.

    • graymatters
      February 4, 2017 at 10:47 pm (2 months ago)

      It isn’t fair, but that’s the nature of social change for you. Koo Stark was viewed as a soft porn actress because (I believe) of one particular film in which she went topless. MM is a cable-tv star in a show which (un)dresses her in tight, low-cut clothes, bra and panties, and carefully arranged bedsheets. Basically, she hasn’t shown anything that can’t pass a PG-13 rating — although she would have shocked my grandmother as much as Koo Stark would have.

    • notasugarhere
      February 5, 2017 at 1:16 pm (2 months ago)

      1982 vs. 2017. Soft core porn vs. television actress.

      “Poor Andrew”? Can’t have any sympathy for him myself. He basically abandoned his wife and kids during the marriage. Not because of his military service, but because when he was on leave, he was anywhere but with his wife and kids. At least he didn’t abandon them after the divorce.

    • Marion Cole
      February 5, 2017 at 4:04 pm (2 months ago)

      It’s 2017!

  29. CrazyAMG
    February 4, 2017 at 9:54 pm (2 months ago)

    I’m ok with Meghan and Harry. All they have done is spend time together and in return they are being judged unfairly. I hope they both have very tough skin because this world is filled with “haters”

  30. Jenny
    February 5, 2017 at 1:05 pm (2 months ago)

    With regard to Meghan’s casual style, it’s a very California look. You could throw a rock and hit a woman who dresses exactly like her. It’s very casual, but the individual pieces can be pricey. Like t-shirt and jeans, but each piece costs $500. Jennifer Aniston personifies the style. I like it now but when first moved to LA from NYC I didn’t understand it. It seemed way too casual to me, esp. people showing up in this look to very expensive restaurants. But now I kind of like it. Once you invest in good pieces, it’s easy to look put together in a hurry.

  31. Halia
    February 5, 2017 at 1:59 pm (2 months ago)

    CrazyAMC i do not hate anyone! Andrew,Princess Margaret & King Edward 8 all had to make a very difficult decision. Meghan has had a marriage that lasted 2 years or less. If Harry & Meghan marry & divorce will the taxpayers keep MM in the style she will be accustom too?

    • notasugarhere
      February 5, 2017 at 2:41 pm (2 months ago)

      Letizia had a marriage that lasted less than two years. She and Felipe have now been married 12+ years and appear to be doing fine.

      The BRF has learned their lessons in dealing with ex-spouses (Diana and Fergie come to mind). They won’t make those mistakes again. If these two married, and in the event they divorced, the BRF would already have a plan in place of how to deal with it. Just like they already have a plan in place of how to deal with Kate Middleton should W&K divorce.

    • CrazyAMG
      February 5, 2017 at 9:27 pm (2 months ago)

      Sorry Halia I wasn’t calling you a “hater” in particular. I’m calling anyone a “hater” that is just looking for reasons to be negative about Meghan. The complaints about how she dresses, her blog, her shoes, her smile, her family, her dogs, her TV show (I really dislike when someone downplays another’s accomplishment. 95% of actors in LA would give up everything to have a recurring role on Suits) etc! I can understand calling Kate shallow because she has had years to prove herself. I’m still giving her the benefit of the doubt that she can bring so much more! But to give Megan that title at this stage in their relationship just isn’t fair…IMO.

      • katemiddletonreview
        February 5, 2017 at 9:36 pm (2 months ago)

        You think I’m a “hater” because I think Meghan’s Tig Talk series, which involves six fluff questions which consistently generate one-word answers from the interviewees, is shallow?

        • CrazyAMG
          February 5, 2017 at 10:02 pm (2 months ago)

          KMR, I’m saying this with so much respect for you and your blog, but yes. I don’t visit the The Tig, but you and I both know that it takes a lot of work and creativity to have a successful blog. IMO, it was a little harsh to call her “shallow” about something she created and it obviously works for those who share her interest. I would be the first person calling anyone out who called you “shallow” because of your blog. I enjoy reading your post, I find your writing skills thought provoking and simply charming. There are some who would disagree. It wouldn’t be right for them to call you shallow because they don’t share the same interest…

          • Sarah
            February 5, 2017 at 10:26 pm (2 months ago)

            Tig talk is shallow. It’s essentially a knock off of Vanity fair’s Proust questionnaire w/out any of the depth/humor.
            She has 6 questions and consist of nickname, can’t live without item, had a wk to escape, etc but calling it shallow does not a hater make

          • katemiddletonreview
            February 6, 2017 at 12:04 am (2 months ago)

            I think you and many others are misunderstanding my point because you haven’t read the Tig Talk series. I never said anything about Meghan’s blog as a whole; I talked specifically about one small part of it: the Tig Talk series. The Tig Talk series is where Meghan gets celebs and influencers to answer six questions she’s come up with. The questions are simple and consistently generate one-word answers from the interviewees. Meghan doesn’t tailor her questions to the people she is interviewing, she gives all of them the standard six questions she came up with. Her subjects never talk about their work because she doesn’t ask them about it, and they often give one-word answers to the questions because the questions are that simple.

            I would never criticize someone for writing a blog (and have defended Meghan previously in the comments on a past article against someone who said she deserved ridicule for writing a blog), because I know how much effort goes into it (and good for Meghan for being able to afford to have a team of people to help her out, because it’s a lot of work to consistently generate content), and just because I’m not interested in the subject of someone else’s blog doesn’t mean I don’t understand how much work goes into creating it.

            My criticism of the Tig Talk series is not about interest level of the subjects, it’s about the level of answers Meghan’s questions generate. Her questions are so simple that they generate simple, one-word or one-sentence answers. Sometimes when you’re doing that type of questionnaire it works – like Us Weekly’s 25 things you didn’t know about series – but Meghan prefaces her interviews with long diatribes about the person’s work and why they are influential, but then doesn’t ask them anything about their work. She sets up the interviews as if they are going to be deep because she has such respect for the person she’s interviewing, but then drops you off a cliff by giving you next to nothing form the actual interview subject because the questions are simple and don’t generate those types of answers.

            Criticizing Meghan’s Tig Talk series doesn’t make me a hater in the same way criticizing Kate’s speeches don’t make me a hater. I can respect Meghan for putting in the work to make a successful blog AND negatively criticize her Tig Talk series for being shallow. I can respect Kate for getting up and making a speech AND negatively criticize the content of her speeches for being shallow. Doing one doesn’t negate the other.

  32. Effie
    February 5, 2017 at 3:26 pm (2 months ago)

    I understand why some people aren’t fans of her, but I like her infinitely more than Kate. I gave Kate a chance and she was a massive disappointment, so I’m giving her a chance too. I do think Harry is a bit desperate and she’s probably looking for the gilded life, but I still like her better than Kate. Her hair blows Kate’s weave out of the water too.

  33. Cali Gurl
    February 5, 2017 at 4:22 pm (2 months ago)

    Wasn’t it Meghan who let every one know that she was dating Harry by posting that banana picture on her Facebook, Twitter, or whatever? If she did, then that is why I don’t like her because she is an attention seeker to me, and I guess having attention as an actress is not enough.

    I think she should’ve respected him and the position he has and not told the press that they were dating. If he wasn’t thinking with the other head, he should’ve told her how it was a mistake going to the press like his father did to Diana’s sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale. lol

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Sarah_McCorquodale

    I would just have more respect for her if she had been discreet.

    • Jen
      February 5, 2017 at 7:13 pm (2 months ago)

      Yep, she did, plus the ‘friends’ and ‘pals’ of Harry ‘confided’ in the press. Quite a fan dance. If they wanted people to know = announce it. If not = shut up. Simple.

    • notasugarhere
      February 5, 2017 at 8:49 pm (2 months ago)

      That is one interpretation, but only one. I don’t think that let any cat out of any bag. Did it state anywhere on there “These bananas prove I’m dating Prince Harry”? No, it was just people going through and interpreting her posts the way they wanted to. Ditto the picture of her dog in a Union Jack sweater, which was a hand-me-down from her other rescue dog from years ago.

      • katemiddletonreview
        February 5, 2017 at 8:54 pm (2 months ago)

        The banana picture, to me, seemed like trolling because she posted it about two days after the story broke of her dating Harry and so many people had already commented on her Insta posts about it. So it’s not like she didn’t know that people knew she was dating Harry. So to me that one seemed like her trolling the people who were commenting on her Insta posts.

        I agree with you about the Union flag sweater since she said that was a hand-me-down.

        • notasugarhere
          February 6, 2017 at 11:40 am (2 months ago)

          To me, it can be read in multiple ways. Deliberately going out of her way to anger the jealous teenage fangirls on tumblr with a banana post? I personally don’t think that was the intention. She may have posted something cute because she was happy, some of the wannabee princess went ballistic and screamed trolling. Lesson learned.

  34. Halia
    February 5, 2017 at 5:53 pm (2 months ago)

    Cali Gurl i agree with you! Halia

  35. Kip
    February 5, 2017 at 9:34 pm (2 months ago)

    It’s intriguing that the sun has gotten every picture and relationship exclusive… Especially when Emily Andrews admitted that her exclusive Norway trip was not true!
    http://www.thesun.co.uk.prince-harry-whisked-girlfriend-meghan-markle-off-on-first-holiday-together-to-see-the-northern-lights

    “byEmilyAndrews @_peppersmint_ @TheSun thanks! Yeah they’ve been hanging out for the past 5 weeks in London (Norway & India aside)”
    https://twitter.com/byEmilyAndrews/status/827280058259644417

    Imo people are being played. All of the pushy celeb pr is nauseating.
    Everyone wants a warm, kind and genuine partner for Harry. When you are as authentic as Victoria, Maxima, Harry etc. The goodness shines through.

    • katemiddletonreview
      February 5, 2017 at 9:40 pm (2 months ago)

      I fail to see how Emily’s quoted tweet is evidence that she lied about the Norway trip. In the tweet, she’s saying that H&M have been together for 5 weeks in London except for when they were in Norway and when M was in India. In the tweet, Emily is saying H&M *did* go to Norway.

      • Kip
        February 5, 2017 at 9:56 pm (2 months ago)

        Not reading it the same way. Agree to disagree.

    • Su funtravel
      February 5, 2017 at 9:54 pm (2 months ago)

      Ditto KMR She was saying that they have been in England together for 5 weeks except for when they went to Norway and she went to India. @kip , you read and saw what you wanted….

  36. CrazyAMG
    February 6, 2017 at 10:28 am (2 months ago)

    KMR, I guess we will have to disagree on this issue. I look forward to your next post on Meghan and Harry. I can only imagine the debate that would take place if Meghan and Harry decided to marry!

  37. Halia
    February 6, 2017 at 1:30 pm (2 months ago)

    Notasugar, as far as Letizia is concerned we do not know if her 1st was ” asked ” remain silent about the marriage? Leti has had an abortion that she tried to hide. I have nothing against divorced people who have had abortions! Crazyamc we all have the right to our opinions! I just think Letizia comes accross as a hypocrite.

    • notasugarhere
      February 8, 2017 at 6:37 pm (2 months ago)

      Halia, it is all speculation that Letizia had an abortion. The lawyer cousin who tried to make her hand him work and get him business (she refused) was the one floating that story. That makes it suspicious. And what business is that of ours either way? Absolutely none of our business, that’s the answer. I’m sure the posters on the C-word spanish language forum would disagree with me, but that place is filled with Letizia-haters. You aren’t going to hate her for it, but you’re going to call her a hypocrite? Interesting philosophy.

      As discussed elsewhere many times. Abortion was legal in Spain at the rumored time with permission of a doctor. As she wasn’t confirmed as a Catholic until right before the marriage? Any “sins” anyone wants to hold against her were washed away. In the eyes of the Catholic Church, she was sin-free at the time of the marriage.

  38. Cookie
    February 6, 2017 at 2:40 pm (2 months ago)

    “So no one can say anything negative about Meghan or else they’re racist? Even if they’ve said the same or even more negative things about Kate, Pippa, and Cressida?”

    KMR, this is the way it feels to me right now. Especially if someone can interpret this post as being “hateful” because you said that the Tig Talk series was shallow. How many times have we called Kate’s words “shallow”? I have read the Tig Talk series and I agree with your assessment of it although there have been some essays that Meghan wrote that I felt were a bit more substantial, albeit a bit cheesy IMO.

    I remember before Christmas a commenter (I think Mrs BBV) gave Camilla a compliment about an event she did decorating a Christmas Tree with sick kids. Mrs BBV said that she thought that “this is what royal should be doing” and someone accused her of being racist towards Meghan even though Meghan was never even mentioned in her comment. I was shocked. I think this has made me, and perhaps other commenters, hesitant to discuss Meghan. We don’t want to be accused of racism if we give legitimate, thoughtful, specific criticisms because some people are quick to use the word “racist” “troll” or “hater”.

    If Meghan does marry Harry and you decide to make your blog “Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle Review” I wish you the best of luck because I suspect you would have one heck of a time moderating comments.

    If that marriage happens and you do decide to write about Meghan, I hope that you continue to stand your ground and hold Meghan to the same exact standards we hold Kate to. For my part, I am going to try to stay out of commenting on Meghan unless and engagement is announced. From that point on, I will comment using one golden rule: “If Kate did what Meghan just did/is doing, would I criticize Kate for it?” If the answer is yes, then it is only fair for me to hold Meghan to the same standard. And as for Harry, I will keep the same rule in mind. This year I will ask myself “if William did what Harry is doing, would I criticize him for it?” if the answer is yes, then Harry should be treated the same way as William and held to the same standards.

    Having said that, I will say just one more thing. Harry having a girlfriend means that people have become more interested in tracing his whereabouts which has made me more aware of just how much Harry vacations. I suspect that he goes on vacations just as much as William. As a matter of fact, I am beginning to realize that William and Harry are much more alike then I previously wanted to believe. I am curious to see Harry get married and have kids because I think he will hide his wife and children in the country the same way William has. I wonder if people will call Harry out for it the way they have with William or will they let Harry get away with it because he has a more charming personality?

  39. Cookie
    February 6, 2017 at 2:50 pm (2 months ago)

    KMR- Maybe this might be of interest to some people who are not familiar with the Tig Talk series. This is an example of a post Meghan wrote where she interview Princess Alia Al-Senussi in 2014. She prefaces the interview by stated that Alia works with the Global Heritage Fund, yet none of her questions to Princess Alia actually address her work. One of the six questions is “What is your nickname?” with her answer being “Alia”. These are very simple, basic, surface level questions with nothing deeper or more substantial.

    http://thetig.com/tig-talk-princess-alia-al-senussi/

    The questions always remain the same. Here is her interview with Pryanka Chopra in 2016. One of the questions is “Everything tastes better with a little..” and Pryanka answers “Tabasco.”

    http://thetig.com/tig-talk-priyanka-chopra/

    Considering that Meghan mentioned that Pryanka was named one of the most influential women in the world, I would like to know more about her than the fact that she likes Tabasco sauce. So yes, I would say that these are some pretty shallow questions. If Kate met one of the most influential people in the world and the best question she could come up with is “what is your nickname?” we would all jump all over that.

  40. Halia
    February 7, 2017 at 1:45 pm (2 months ago)

    Excuse me i meant to print Letizia’s 1st husband might be ” asked ” not reveal why the marriage ended! Letizia married her professor? This is what i read, i could be wrong!