Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

British Royal Family Gossip: Part 35

Let's continue our discussion of the British Royal Family.

The Sussex baby's birth is imminent. Here is an improved poll for the SohoBébé's name with more selections. I botched the other one.

Below is the link for the previous Part 34.

Keep Calm and Carry on, Peeps!

by Anonymousreply 600April 8, 2019 10:47 PM

My apolgies. It looks like I screwed up this one too! I hit the post button in error before I finished. Oh well. I'm retiring from polling.

Here are the other choices that I was suppose to put in my poll above.

4) Traditional Names: Abigail, Martin (MLK Jr.), Malcolm (X), Emily, Stephen, Audrey, Evelyn, Cecily, Benjamin, Christopher, Jane.John, Josiah, Marcus/Mark, Lydia, Mary (consort) Ruth, Bridget, Paul, Patrick, Simon/Simone, Anthony, Josiah, Isabel (form of Elizabeth), Daniel etc...

5) Trendy, Popular Names: Oliver/Olivia, Emma/Emily, Julia, Leah, Lucy, Chloe, Stella, Zoe, Lucas, Finn, Jude etc...

6) Mythological Names: Athena, Penelope, Jason, Aurora, Lysander, Daphne,Cassandra, Damon etc...

7) Posh-Brit Aristo Names: Jasper, Cordelia, Araminta, Hugh/Hugo, Valentine, Antonia, Tristan, Lavinia, Peregrine, Ophelia, Nigel, Arabella, Milo, Rupert etc...

8) Nature/Word Names: Felicity, Iris, Rose, Verity, Lily, Violet, Ruby, Hazel etc...

9) Unisex Names: Spencer, Bailey, Jordan, Riley, Morgan, Sawyer, Rowan, Darcy, Finley, Quinn etc...

10) Nickname Names (all the rage in Britain)- Alfie, Ellie, Jake, Hal, Millie, Maisie, Bonnie, Elsie, Poppy etc...

Part 34 is in the link.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1April 5, 2019 9:17 PM

These threads fill up fast. Just wait until the tadpole hatches, and crawls out of the pond. We will go through one in record time.

by Anonymousreply 2April 5, 2019 11:58 PM

R597 in the previous thread - Adam Bidwell is not ugly and has biceps therefore Prince Harry is a homosexual?

by Anonymousreply 3April 6, 2019 12:40 AM

You left off the Vivian Vance option, OP.

by Anonymousreply 4April 6, 2019 12:42 AM

“Well someone ran sussexroyal through Phlanx.com which is a paid instagram engagement calculator. 30% of the followers are and 2% are influencers.“

30% are what? Russian bots?

by Anonymousreply 5April 6, 2019 12:42 AM

The problem with the name poll is that it's more likely to be a blend of "family honour" names and older traditional royal names . . . i.e, Diana Elizabeth Victoria, or Alexandra Diana Elizabeth. If it's a boy it's easier and it's most likely to be Charles - Charles Henry something . . .

by Anonymousreply 6April 6, 2019 12:55 AM

I predict the baby who they are trying to convince the realm is a girl, will have a name with Botswana connections, and after doing preliminary research, I have concluded the baby will be named Precious Mercy.

by Anonymousreply 7April 6, 2019 12:57 AM

It will be twins

by Anonymousreply 8April 6, 2019 12:58 AM

Chirp chirp

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9April 6, 2019 1:03 AM

These threads continue to distract me from politics.

by Anonymousreply 10April 6, 2019 1:03 AM

Yes. Twin girls. A single female embryo will be implanted in each of two surrogates resulting in at least one healthy birth. They will choose the cutest, or choose both.

by Anonymousreply 11April 6, 2019 1:04 AM

They'll call it what Megantoinette decides to call it. He's pussywhipped.

by Anonymousreply 12April 6, 2019 1:05 AM

R593 It was a real fan comment. Typos can be fun!

by Anonymousreply 13April 6, 2019 1:08 AM

Putting this gif here. The original caption was joking about her being a motormouth, but in this gif you can not only see how much product is choking her "tendrils" but the botox in her entire upper face is kind of offputting.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 14April 6, 2019 1:11 AM

Of COURSE Botswana connections. That is perfect. That is exactly what they'll do with the name.

by Anonymousreply 15April 6, 2019 1:12 AM

R594 I can't believe they are that many paid posters. The comments seem so genuine.

by Anonymousreply 16April 6, 2019 1:12 AM

R15 They might do it with a middle name, but not with the first name. Meghan doesn't give f.a. about Africa and her entire life she has leant white - she'll make sure that baby has a first name drawn from a pool associated with one of the whitest most privileged families on earth, so no one makes any mistake about who the kid really is - they might throw in some African place name in the middle, but that kid is going to look, walk, talk, sneeze, pee, fart, and poop English Royal or Meghan will know the reason why.

by Anonymousreply 17April 6, 2019 1:52 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18April 6, 2019 1:58 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19April 6, 2019 1:59 AM

R18 - But due to his dementia we aren't going to be able to count on the info.

What we need to do is get William and Kate pissed and then start asking questions.

by Anonymousreply 20April 6, 2019 2:00 AM

True, R20. Although I reckon Andrew would be even more indiscreet. Apparently, he can’t stand her.

by Anonymousreply 21April 6, 2019 2:11 AM

Baby names. The first name might be traditional, Alice, but then there will be something very untraditional to show how worldly and enlightened she is. Yoga-inspired like 'Ananda' or 'Indra'. It will still be a "pretty" name, very soft and melodic and a bit exotic.

I don't think the Queen needs to approve it.

by Anonymousreply 22April 6, 2019 2:42 AM

R22 - It's courteous to inform HM but no, she doesn't need to approve it.

Alice has historic ties to the family (Philip's mother, Princess Alice of Battenberg). One of Pss. Anne's names is Alice. And, I rather like Alice Elizabeth Diana or Alice Diana Elizabeth. Very pretty. and Lady Alice Mountbatten-Windsor is very lovely.

I don't think Alice has been discussed as a possibility yet.

by Anonymousreply 23April 6, 2019 2:51 AM

I used to think it was an old lady's name, but now I like my grandmother's name, Evelyn.

by Anonymousreply 24April 6, 2019 3:04 AM

R21 I vote for an evening with Fergie and everyone brings a bottle. She'd be a wealth of gossip and fun, too.

by Anonymousreply 25April 6, 2019 3:09 AM

R19 Such dirty people and dirty games. BRF is hellbent on destroying themselves.

by Anonymousreply 26April 6, 2019 3:10 AM

me too r25. and honestly, do you think she would spend the whole night bitching about Meghan? I don't.

by Anonymousreply 27April 6, 2019 3:10 AM

It is weird how much Meghan matters to so many bitches on these threads. She is the very minor wife of the guy who will never be king cause about three kids now stand in the way. Why do people care so damn much. It is kinda bizarre.

by Anonymousreply 28April 6, 2019 3:17 AM

This is pointless b*tchery (autocorrect won’t let me type the word). If you don’t like it, don’t read.

by Anonymousreply 29April 6, 2019 3:27 AM

R27 We'd get to hear about far more interesting people and events over the last 30 plus years! And she'd be laughing the whole time. That'd be an evening to remember!

by Anonymousreply 30April 6, 2019 3:30 AM

it would actually be hilarious r30. OMG, Fergie unplugged. that would be truly hilarious. And I actually like Princess Diana, but the stories would still be hilarious.

by Anonymousreply 31April 6, 2019 3:36 AM

[quote] Why do people care so damn much. It is kinda bizarre.

I agree. I don't think it's racism, it's something else hard to define. Talking about Meghan makes these people feel media-savvy and "in the know." It's very much like the readers of CDAN, who are also obsessive and not very bright.

by Anonymousreply 32April 6, 2019 3:39 AM

yup r32, don't get it. and I actually do get if you don't love Meghan, I kinda like her, but so what, she ain't some saint and I get if you don't like her, but why this crazy ass hate. who cares? why do they care so much? I don't get it.

by Anonymousreply 33April 6, 2019 3:44 AM

I don't think they will allow the royal rules to apply. Even if the child was getting a title, which it isn't, Megantoinette runs that show so firmly she'll do as she pleases and Dim will let her. If she was a plant she'd be self seeding

by Anonymousreply 34April 6, 2019 4:03 AM

see this, right here, r34, Megantoinette will run that show? what? What the fuck? what exactly is she going to do? Storm the palace and demand she gets to Do as she pleases? What the fuck?

by Anonymousreply 35April 6, 2019 4:08 AM

Who says you have to get it, R33? You and that other twat don’t get to dictate what other people talk about...who on earth told you that you could? “Wah wah...I don’t get it”. So? Go find someone who gives a shit what you think.

You know there are endless forums with people slavishly adoring the cunt, right? Go there and demand that they cease & desist...I dare you. Go there and say...”Why are you all licking the rancid, gaping arsehole of a woman who would hold her nose and do a puke face if you got within 100 yards of her”.

I can’t stand the lying whore. I can’t escape her so I like, every now and then, to share that dislike with others. It’s called conversation.

“I kinda like her”. Bless. You do seem like her low standard of fan. The absence of even rudimentary grammar was a big clue.

Now, off you fuck.

by Anonymousreply 36April 6, 2019 4:08 AM

and this bitch r36. You can't escape it? seriously? you need to tune in to every Meghan story? You can't escape it? really?

by Anonymousreply 37April 6, 2019 4:10 AM

Mama Doria's sweet, precious Flower.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 38April 6, 2019 4:11 AM

"What's the name of the movie where the rich guy wakes up with a horse's head in his bed?"

" Sex and the City? "

by Anonymousreply 39April 6, 2019 4:16 AM

Prince Charles needs a tailor. Surprised Camilla not on him about his rumpled appearance.

I loved the Sussex elephant Instragram post,me and 3 million+ others.

Anymore about Princess Bea and that inappropriate suitor.Marriage news?anything....his ex wife is talking negatively to the paps?I guess for money?

by Anonymousreply 40April 6, 2019 4:21 AM

people are too fucking stupid sometimes. it's an issue.

by Anonymousreply 41April 6, 2019 4:22 AM

It's fun to watch the Meghan trainwreck. Doesn't mean that we are all posting bile in the Daily Mail comments section. Discussing MMs fuck-ups is pointless bitchery at its best.

by Anonymousreply 42April 6, 2019 4:30 AM

it's weird to watch people obsessed with Meghan. I kinda don't get it.

by Anonymousreply 43April 6, 2019 4:32 AM

and yeah, I get that she makes mistakes and is kinda of a bitch, but the weird obsessions, if it ain't racial, what the fuck is it?

by Anonymousreply 44April 6, 2019 4:33 AM

It's a soap opera, and mm has signed on to be the villain.

by Anonymousreply 45April 6, 2019 4:35 AM

yeah maybe. maybe she gets the whole reality show thing. but I suspect not.

by Anonymousreply 46April 6, 2019 4:36 AM

“Kinda” - it’s “kind of” “Cause” - it’s “because”

Capitalising the appropriate word.

I could go on, but the above speak volumes about the intelligence of some of the posters on these threads.

by Anonymousreply 47April 6, 2019 4:38 AM

R39 !!!!

Seriously though, like everyone here, I could bitch about the Salad Tosser all day but I do question what it is about her that triggers me.

I think, like R36 its the lies and fakery and thinking she can just come in at the 11th hour and shit over 2000 years of tradition. FUCK her ghetto ass. I think the BRF should end after Charles, but not because of MeGain. It’s irking me that a total nobody like her seems to be expediting this possibility.

Also I would be incandescent with rage if I was a breadline Brit having to support the SohoHouse 2. I feel for them, I really do. At least the entitled talentless cunts in this county pay for their cuntery themselves.

Well done that commenter in the last thread who said if the Yacht Ho had any sense, she would know her best bet is to lay low like Zara. But as that same poster pointed out, the Butthole Licker has zero talents or interests (like Zara does with horses) so preening and posing is all she knows.

GROSS AND SHE IS NOT A HOLLYWOOD ACTRESS!! She is a cheesy extra, who walked up and down in a game show, then did the same in a shitty legal soap nobody watched.

by Anonymousreply 48April 6, 2019 4:39 AM

or maybe yes, let's take what is probably true. She is probably smarter than Harry, who is kinda hot but ain't the brightest bulb on the tree. Maybe she gets this is all kinda game. Maybe she gets to play villain, and it's kinda fun. But I don't know if it is fun.

by Anonymousreply 49April 6, 2019 4:39 AM

I find the HazBean shit show too cartoonish for words, they are so horrible one can’t help but jeer. Thank God i’m not British though because then I might be pissed at these two hypocrites telling me how I should live my life whilst mooching off the public dole and republicanism could not come soon enough.

by Anonymousreply 50April 6, 2019 4:40 AM

Dontcha be gettin all hoity toity on us, R47!

by Anonymousreply 51April 6, 2019 4:41 AM

you yourself admit you don't actually care r48. it's just this thing. some people don't like Meghan, and, I gotta ask, is it racial? why care so much?

by Anonymousreply 52April 6, 2019 4:43 AM

For most people I don't think it's racial - I know as far as myself and other Commonwealth people, it's definitely that she is not behaving as she should - being a member of the royal family is a job and she is behaving atrociously. It's also funny to watch. I think maybe it's a racial issue in the USA but that's not so much an issue here. If there was a person of colour in the royal family who was behaving as they were expected to, it would be a non-issue.

by Anonymousreply 53April 6, 2019 4:48 AM

I am DYING to see the Soho House brand crash and burn and turn into a cheesy Motel 6.

Can everyone go leave funny shit reviews on Yelp and post links here?

Also they freak out over privacy: quick everyone lie and say they were disgusted to see Bryan Singer and Kevin S dining with a couple of teens.

by Anonymousreply 54April 6, 2019 4:48 AM

what is she doing that is so bad, r53? what is so bad?

by Anonymousreply 55April 6, 2019 4:49 AM

By BRF standards, Frog Cott will always be a dump.

You see, you don't get to join that family without being put through a series of character/loalty/trust worthiness tests, and you better believe MM got the all and failed them all. So here we are today.

Simplified, think of the film "First Wives Club" - The Queen is Gunilla Garson-Goldberg to Meghan's Shelly.

by Anonymousreply 56April 6, 2019 4:56 AM

[quote]what is she doing that is so bad, [R53]? what is so bad?

Absolutely everything. If you live in the UK and/or a Commonwealth country you grow up learning about how the Royal Family are supposed to do their jobs - probably because we are paying for it. Outside the UK etc perhaps it's seen as a novelty but for us it's seen as work. It's just the same as having a normal job - there is a way to behave and outrageously breaking the rules is not acceptable to whoever is paying your salary.

by Anonymousreply 57April 6, 2019 5:01 AM

I don't hate Meghan, for her race or any other reason. She's probably nice enough in person. But I love the history and tradition of the monarchy. I'm American but had a British parent and grew up following them. Mother always said, "They're like family." Corny as that sounds. Can't imagine the world without the Queen.

I worry about change. Some is good, but not all. In the age of social media mobbing, it's all too easy to upend things. There is value to "mystique." I cringe at cheap celebrity antics and media drama (hated when Diana did it). I don't like a newcomer banging on about global change. Who the hell is she? Also, she spends too much money - it's gross.

That said, I wish them an easy delivery of a healthy baby, and then they should settle the fuck down and enjoy their family life.

by Anonymousreply 58April 6, 2019 5:06 AM

[R-44]. It's a train wreck. Commoner girl marries a prince and everybody should live happily after ever. But, no, that is not the case.

Girl alienates in-laws, makes sister-in-law cry; tries to upstage cousin's wedding with baby announcement; is grossly insensitive to the populace (who are dealing with a tough economy and are hoarding supplies in anticipation of Brexit) by having $200k baby shower and follows that with "baby-moon" costing $33k; writes strange things on bananas; walks in front of prince; wears extremely expensive clothing which manages to be both ill-fitting and unflattering while her mommy in LA is carting things to the local laundromat (can't she buy her mom a washer-dryer?); she goes to NY but doesn't see her mother; she refuses to wear British designers to help her new country; and, apparently, her father-in-law has to intervene to tell her that she can't wear a tiara because she refuses to listen to her staff. The list goes on and on. So many people would be grateful for a nice spouse, a new baby, a $5 million house (even with the airplane issue), and the ability to not worry about money for the rest of their lives. And, that's without even considering the benefits of a glamorous life-style. But, somehow she is managing to destroy it all and it's amazing to watch.

And, with all this, she may be undermining the stability of a 2000 year old monarchy. On a macro level, with the reigning monarch in her 90's; a nation somewhat ambivalent about the monarchy, Brexit looming , and a dysfunctional Parliament; she and Harry could be one of the catalysts that contribute to a massive societal change. Like I said, it's a train wreck. You can't keep your eyes off it.

by Anonymousreply 59April 6, 2019 5:12 AM

Take down those so called royal pretentious assholes Meghan. Take them down!

by Anonymousreply 60April 6, 2019 5:17 AM

[Quote] If you live in the UK and/or a Commonwealth country you grow up learning about how the Royal Family are supposed to do their jobs - probably because we are paying for it.

"The Commonwealth" has better uses for its education system than teaching about the British Royal Family. Having lived in and visited several commonwealth nations I can categorical call bullshit on the idea that the role of the fucking 6th in line forms part of the board education system in the Commomwealth. If a commonwealth nation still has the queen as head of state then they know about the governor general at best.

Outside of the niche gossip threads, nobody gives a shit about any of them most of the time.

Not worth adoration. Not worth hate.

by Anonymousreply 61April 6, 2019 5:25 AM

Meghan Markle showed up in Rwanda for 3 days, posed with some photogenically poor black kids, went home and wrote an article about what a living saint she is...but never once, a single time, talked about Rwanda or the people she met there. It was all about her.

To use people living in the most extreme circumstances for your own PR is quite oustandingly disgusting. And it’s not the only time she’s done that,

That is who this middle-aged tart is. Nothing any of us could ever say about her would be worse than her disrespect for the poorest people in the world.

That is why I can’t stand her. And I have no time at all for illiterate prats too dumb to call her out on it.

So, fuck off with your incoherent “i kinda like her” bullshit. And learn how to use capitals....it”s not hard.

by Anonymousreply 62April 6, 2019 5:26 AM

Don't feed the "you haters are racists" or "it's gotta be racial" trolls. They'll never understand nor accept that a POC can be criticized or hated for being awful and fake human being. They can't see things/ people without taking race as a factor in everything, in. a way they are the real racists. Stop defending yourself against these trolls, they wish to get you on the defensive so they can possibly play gotcha! with you. I see through these types of people because I'm biracial myself (East Asian/ White).

by Anonymousreply 63April 6, 2019 6:15 AM

R61 You're mistaken. As a Canadian, I grew up singing "God Save The Queen" in my classroom every morning right before classes began. We had Queen Elizabeth's portrait up in our classroom, and a Royal family picture in the main hall. This was true for every school in the country. When they came for a visit it wasn't a back page byline - it was headline news with full coverage. So like R57, HM and her family were and are an important part of our culture. The Queen is the head of our country just like in Britain. But here the Governor-General is the Queen's Representative and is a fundamental part of our government and opens and closes Parliament - even if only figuratively. He is present in Parliament; it is his duty. Legally, he can actually dissolve Parliament, though it's unprecedented. I met the most popular Governor General Canada ever had, and it was very special. He got tremendous press during his tenure - I doubt there was anyone in the country who didn't know quite a lot about him. He was very revered.

Furthermore, The Queen's portrait is on our coins and all our paper money. So Her Majesty is an intrinsic part of Canada, as well as its ruler since we are a Commonwealth country.

We all took a personal interest in the Royal family over the years. Canada watched Prince Charles date (he dated a Canadian girl for a short while - big news!) and eventually get married, etc., .. and I was glued to the tv watching Princess Anne riding in the Olympics. We go back a long ways with this generation. We all took great delight in their lives when going well, and were very saddened when it did not. We've seen the birth of William and Harry, and of course the marriage and children of the other Royals. All front page news and extensive tv coverage. And all trips by The Queen, or her representatives, to visit any Commonweath country were/are also headline news.

Everything Royal was in the news all the time. And their family milestones were huge news - major news coverage.

Fast forward to present day and we're as confused, and increasingly appalled, as our British cousins regarding the current affairs of Prince Harry and his new bride. Their behaviour is so out of bounds as to be stunning and historical and royal protocol is being tossed aside. It's incredibly bizarre.

Don't discount the importance of the Royal family in Canadian history and culture. They have been, and still are, intrinsically entwined with our Canadian identity for well over 100 years. Ignorance doesn't discount the facts.

by Anonymousreply 64April 6, 2019 6:37 AM

[R63]

Being Bi-racial and co-signing the racist hate of Markle.Wow do you not realize if they use words like GHETTO to describe royalty,what they will say about YOU.No these attacks are very racially motivated.By people who at best are probally mongrels themselves.

by Anonymousreply 65April 6, 2019 6:58 AM

No one cares about the Queen in Canada.

by Anonymousreply 66April 6, 2019 7:21 AM

R66 Oh Justin......you ARE naughty! Now, off to bed with you.

by Anonymousreply 67April 6, 2019 7:25 AM

R61 I was born, raised and am currently a tax payer who lives in a Commonwealth country. You’d better believe that I give a shit when my taxes are paying for a couple of free loaders like the Harkles to descend on my country - Australia - as they did last year, dispensing pears of wisdom to the masses.

I’m a republican but I have enormous respect for the Queen for a difficult job well done. It’s sad that it is already going to shit and she’s not even dead yet.

by Anonymousreply 68April 6, 2019 7:37 AM

^^ pearls of wisdom

by Anonymousreply 69April 6, 2019 7:38 AM

R65 Welcome back Crazy! I’ve missed you! You and you’re nonsensical ranting!

by Anonymousreply 70April 6, 2019 7:44 AM

R65 It’s really quite pathetic the way you show up, accuse everyone of racism & then run away before you can be challenged. So, not only are you an idiot, you’re a coward too.

by Anonymousreply 71April 6, 2019 8:29 AM

R65:

Unnecessary use of “[“ and “]”. ✔️ Random capitalisation (such as in “Bi-racial”). ✔️ Not understanding that there should be a space after a full stop or comma? ✔️ Racist conspiracy theories (including, rather ironically, you calling other posters “mongrels”)? ✔️ Infantile spelling - e.g. “probally”? ✔️

You’re nothing if not consistent, although I do miss “an” for “and”! Throw me a bone, Crazy!

by Anonymousreply 72April 6, 2019 8:32 AM

[quote]"The Commonwealth" has better uses for its education system than teaching about the British Royal Family. Having lived in and visited several commonwealth nations I can categorical call bullshit on the idea that the role of the fucking 6th in line forms part of the board education system in the Commomwealth

Sorry - I actually live here, grew up here, went to school here and so I call bullshit on your call of bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 73April 6, 2019 9:38 AM

Just having a look at TripAdvisor and this made me laugh, ( Anonymous stayed at SoHo Farmhouse December 2018) ....

If you would like to go to the swimming pool you cannot take your robes or flip flops so you have to wrap a towel around you and walk barefoot from the lukewarm pool to the hottubs / saunas WHICH WERE ALL FULL with drunk women or couples making out . The pool may look inviting but it is actually quite cold and the steam room smelt horredously of eggs !

by Anonymousreply 74April 6, 2019 10:27 AM

The comments on TripAdvisor make it sound great if you're young and dumb, but seriously lacking in amenities if you're over, oh, say the age of 30 and actually have expectations.

by Anonymousreply 75April 6, 2019 10:32 AM

Here's one example:

Sterile, soulless and contrived. Where to begin? Let's do the positives. Aesthetically it's fantastic. Great attention to detail and beautifully landscaped.

Beyond that things begin to creak somewhat.The service is superficial and ineffectual. I requested a bike for my 4 year old having been told I wasn't allowed to use hers (which I brought). After 5 phone calls to reception and no suitable bike appearing, I ended up getting hers from the car, by which time it was late afternoon and getting dark.

Swimming for kids at the weekend is only permitted for two hours each morning. Beyond that the pool sits empty. Yes that's right, two full hours. Woohoo! So after mopping up the tears from disappointed kids we tried boating after checking with reception. On arrival at the lake we we told there wasn't enough water! Cue more tears.

Credit where credit is due, the playground is well equipped however true to the sanitary vibe, kids cannot be left to play on their own. Yep kids in a secure playground, inside a fenced off private estate need constant supervision. Groan

Food was generic yet priced as if not. Nothing abnormal here sadly but then it begs the question where are the member benefits? Some staff (though not all) were also pretty surly and self-important which didn't help.

Reading most of the reviews here I seem to be an outlier which I genuinely find surprising. That said, maybe Soho Farmhouse isn't for me. I played a game of a) trying to get eye contact with other guests (1 point) and b) getting a smile from them (3 points). I think I managed 7 points all weekend.

Long story short, Soho Farmhouse is a club for sourfaced, joyless urbanites who want country air without the character (mud and humour). However I suspect if I was living in London, in my mid twenties and took myself way too seriously then I'd absolutely love it... Read less Date of stay: February 2019 Trip type: Traveled with family This review is the subjective opinion of a TripAdvisor member and not of TripAdvisor LLC.

by Anonymousreply 76April 6, 2019 10:35 AM

Maybe they'll go completely off-piste and call it LaTaneequa

by Anonymousreply 77April 6, 2019 10:37 AM

Its funny, I never renember MM is bi-racual! I dont see any AA roots in her AT ALL! Its only when she and the press goes out of its way and stresses the fact and when she is with her mother.

by Anonymousreply 78April 6, 2019 10:41 AM

*racial

by Anonymousreply 79April 6, 2019 10:42 AM

She's biracial when it suits her, and white when being biracial doesn't suit her.

by Anonymousreply 80April 6, 2019 10:46 AM

Like R10, I find this whole thing to be a distraction from the actual shit state of politics and the environment. I do revere the Queen, but think the monarchy will flounder and fail without her. Markle herself is a bit player who could have been played by any old grifter, but she is a small irritant in the shoe which will continue to grate and eventually turn into a big seething abscess if not checked.

But to answer the question above about why are we so invested that we have 35 threads, for me it's primarily entertainment and distraction.

by Anonymousreply 81April 6, 2019 12:04 PM

I suppose if you think "LaTaneequa" is her "black roots" then it's no small wonder you don't get it.

There is no one way to act as a "race". No she is not obligated to only date/fuck/marry black men. No she does not have to only listen to hiphop to be black enough for you. Crack open a book once in awhile and actually go outside and maybe, just maybe, you'll educate yourself.

by Anonymousreply 82April 6, 2019 12:08 PM

"Crack open a book once in awhile and actually go outside and maybe, just maybe, you'll educate yourself."

When was the last time you cracked open a book, you fucking hypocrite?

by Anonymousreply 83April 6, 2019 12:13 PM

"She's biracial when it suits her, and white when being biracial doesn't suit her."

She's half white you plonker. Btw, how can you be another race when it suits you? How does that work? Yanks can be so fucking stupid.

Oh and this comment of yours is absolute gold: "I'm watching LA Story, and the Sarah Jessica Parker character reminds me so much of The Duchess of Exess, except that SJP is a bazillion times better looking and isn't nearly as catty."

LOL, that says everything there is to say about you.

No wonder you're so angry.

by Anonymousreply 84April 6, 2019 12:21 PM

You're sooooo right, R84. I guess you told me!

by Anonymousreply 85April 6, 2019 12:23 PM

I was looking at Sussex royal and M was all over the place saying that they persuaded people to give to charity for the birth of their child . Easy peasy isn’t it . People donate money and they can bask in the glow . It would be better they are the donators with all their money . Now people will think how woke she and Harry are . Also they never mentioned once Sir Richard Attenborough when Harry was at an event with William and his father . All about how grand he is and how grand M is . If they want to be celebs they have to give up their titles and go to live in the real world . Without his title Harry is a nobody.

by Anonymousreply 86April 6, 2019 12:32 PM

The fact is, sometimes she's white and sometimes she's black. It depends who she's trying to get money from.

by Anonymousreply 87April 6, 2019 12:33 PM

Yawn.

She's both and no one can take that away from her. It's a fact.

These women will continue to pop up with wealthy white men so you might as well get used to it.

by Anonymousreply 88April 6, 2019 12:37 PM

She said herself in an interview, she was white when she auditioned for a white role, bi-racial for a bi-racial role and would even become Latina for a Latina role.

by Anonymousreply 89April 6, 2019 12:52 PM

And to add to that, she moaned about there not being roles for her, blaming her heritage. But hold on, she became whatever she wanted to be during those audition...maybe it was because she was a SHIT actress that she didn't get the parts.

by Anonymousreply 90April 6, 2019 12:55 PM

*auditions*

by Anonymousreply 91April 6, 2019 12:55 PM

Err...That's part of any acting audition. It's play pretend.

You are whatever the role requires of you. That goes for other things as well such as talent. Can you play tennis? Sure can! Hula hoop? You betcha! Jump up and down while balancing this table on your head! Yep!!

by Anonymousreply 92April 6, 2019 1:07 PM

Yes, I know that, of course it is, but this is how she is in life as general, not just auditions.

by Anonymousreply 93April 6, 2019 1:10 PM

Did Angelina Jolie create the faux humanitarian public relations strategy? I hope this PR style dies w MM.

Wht did she pursue that strategy prior to her BRF days? She was low on cash shacking up in a rental in Toronto. Paying for the PR and travel must have been expensive.

And then knowing the Suits show would end soon how was she planning on supporting herself?

by Anonymousreply 94April 6, 2019 1:18 PM

The engagement will be announced so please don't call him a gigolo PR plant in the royal friendly Telegraph story on Princess Beatrice's boyfriend is out.

He seems wonderful. But Fergie's Insta told you that...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 95April 6, 2019 1:35 PM

R81... I think it could flounder but the court will figure it out. To Charles' dismay he may find he needs to keep Anne, Edward and Sophie on the payroll... there's only so many hands on deck in a smaller royal family. Whatever you think of them, the Queen had four children to deploy in adulthood... Charles has two and one of them is Dim and his prize winning wife.

by Anonymousreply 96April 6, 2019 1:38 PM

How fucking old is R64? Canadian kids have not sung God Save the Queen in school for over nearly 40 years.

Commonwealth nations do not pay taxes to the UK or to support the BRF. For the most part, they pay taxes that are used for

A. The Governor General, lieutenant-governor and their office staff.

B. The Commonwealth Secretariat

C. The security of the royals on official visits.

D. Services Commonwealth nations may still use, for example The Privy Council.

Of that list, the only thing related to the BRF personally is the cost of security. That is a cost that would be incurred for any visiting dignitary and is not unique to the BRF.

The fact that a few Canadians and Australians on this thread care about the BRF is not the same as saying as a whole the people in the commonwealth learn about the role of the royal family in schools . Even for those who have the queen on their money or have her as head of state, that is governmental and is very different from learning about her family.

The media report on the royals as celebrities. For example, Princess Anne was in Canada in 2018. Not even a blip for Canadians. Hell, Harry's Invictus Games in Toronto was in the news more for his relationship than for "the role of the royal family". He did his walkabout at the most touristy venue because that's the only place people will be hanging around.

Love or hate Meghan if that's your thing but it's ridiculous and just flat out wrong to claim that the 2.3 billion people in the Commonwealth give a shit about these people because they matter to our lives.

by Anonymousreply 97April 6, 2019 1:49 PM

I live in a Commonwealth country, South Africa. We love the British Royals as people we read about in celebrity-laden magazines. The Queen is not our Head of State, we're a Republic. The difference with a country like Canada is that the British Head of State is also their Head of State. So there is not such thing as "in Commonwealth countries" because not all of us are closely tied with Britain. We may enjoy discussing our cultural relations in the arts and education and such, but each country is different.

by Anonymousreply 98April 6, 2019 1:52 PM

Is Sara Latham behind the Fortnite stance - if so she's a dick

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 99April 6, 2019 1:57 PM

What r10 said.

I'm no less shallow and more deep than any other DLer, but still, it's the rare DL thread that I don't read every post before I comment, but, I don't with these BRF threads.

And what r37 said. As soon as my eye catches "merching", or that distinct, unmistakable tone of My-Cheese-Is-Off-the-Cracker-With-Meagain-hate, I scroll past it; r48 being Exhibit A of that kind of post.

I don't begrudge her haters having fun. It's that it's a fun that I've noted, and go past to find a topic that compels me to respond such as her terrible garments choices, and if the DoSwill right the ship.

And, anybody who denies that at least SOME of the DoS haters aren't motivated by bigotry is not to be taken seriously.

On the other hand, some of the DoS stans, are ridiculous. They love and believe the "Kate is jealous of Meghan" nonsense.

Please. Does the moon acknowledge a barking dog? The Duchess of Cambridge probably doesn't deign to bother having a reaction to the DoS.

The DoS has not played her hand of cards well.

She's, of course, no Prince Hal, but she needs to give the heave-ho to her Show Folk Trash A List Celebrity ilk she's slumming with by deploying Falstaff Treatment: When Falstaff (playing the role of Prince Hal) says "please, daddy, don't banish Falstaff," Hal ruthlessly replies, "I do. I will."

by Anonymousreply 100April 6, 2019 1:58 PM

Not to read too much into photo images, but Harry does have a very mean, angry look to him, like he could be extremely cutting when aggravated.

by Anonymousreply 101April 6, 2019 2:00 PM

Sorry about the typos and grammar at r100.

by Anonymousreply 102April 6, 2019 2:02 PM

Serena let the cat out of the bag!!!

by Anonymousreply 103April 6, 2019 2:10 PM

Twin girls!!

by Anonymousreply 104April 6, 2019 2:11 PM

Meghan is a narcissist and her narcissism in on display for all the world to see, day in and day out. That is triggering to many who've been raised by one other otherwise played by one.

by Anonymousreply 105April 6, 2019 2:33 PM

Serena's getting a lot of press out of the royal connection. Harry and Sparkle did once say that if their friends were caught speaking to the media they would be cut off. I guess that does not include all Meghan's new celebrity cling-ons. But said that Harry's old chums have been ghosted for absolutely nothing. I go from thinking he's in on it all, and enjoying this celebrity ride, to wondering about his mental health. And wondering if she is causing that part of his health a lot of problems, that will manifest into something awful, in the future.

by Anonymousreply 106April 6, 2019 2:33 PM

I so agree R105.

by Anonymousreply 107April 6, 2019 2:34 PM

That should be "sad that" not "said that" at R106.

by Anonymousreply 108April 6, 2019 2:35 PM

So I am a Canadian. I have no reverance for the Royal Family or even the Queen, though I have great fondness for her because she's a fixture. She has been Queen longer than I have been alive. As a child, I remember her portrait in every classroom (because that's what they did then. Imagine not now.) I really like having a monarch as head of state because it's so subtle. Hell, she's barely here. There's this symbolism and history all around it, but yet the person isn't in your face.

The constitutional historian Bagehot wrote 'we must not let daylight in upon the magic.' There is a kind of distance in aspects of the monarchy. That's what I like because it isn't in your face and, even at their low points, you don't really despise a member of the Royal Family the same way you might a Macron or a Trump.

They may not be above idiocy and human foible but they are above politics, which will be part of Megantoinette's problem and, subsequently, Harry's, because she leads him around by the hose.

I'm perfectly content with the constitutional monarchy system of government and a king or queen as head of state and, in the Canadian situation, largely resident outside the country. I don't think it will last forever, but our Constitution makes it tricky to extricate too, so it won't happen lightly or easily. I don't think in my lifetime.

by Anonymousreply 109April 6, 2019 2:38 PM

R28 - Oh, and why do we care about all those actors, actresses, figure skaters, politicians, etc., whom we don't know will never meet and who mean nothing to our real lives?

It's called gossip.

by Anonymousreply 110April 6, 2019 2:44 PM

R80 - Nailed it.

by Anonymousreply 111April 6, 2019 2:45 PM

Princess Tessy is divorced. Ex will pay £4000 per year child support for each of the two boys and she can stay in the house in London until the youngest turns 18. She also gets some unspecified maintenance. She was asking for 1.5 million from the Prince's family (Luxembourg, he's the fourth son) but the judge ruled against taking the family's wealth into consideration. I think he's already paying school fees.

by Anonymousreply 112April 6, 2019 2:59 PM

Meant "or" not "other" at R105

by Anonymousreply 113April 6, 2019 3:03 PM

^ sorry I can't find the non-BRF royals thread. Princess Tessy featured in that; she was acting as her own lawyer.

by Anonymousreply 114April 6, 2019 3:04 PM

I totally agree, r105. It's triggering to see how she behaves. It's triggering to see how the people who support her behave. Those of us who grew up with one of these soulless vampires know exactly who she is and how hopeless it is to expect her to improve any facet of her behavior. She's a classic narcissist and Harry's a classic enabler, if not an inverted narcissist himself. She is an empty shell with a rapacious appetite for attention and everyone else is merely a mirror, not a human being.

by Anonymousreply 115April 6, 2019 3:08 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 116April 6, 2019 3:23 PM

R96 - Perhaps. Charles probably won't take the throne for another 5 years. By then, let's say in five years, he'll have William, Kate, Harry, Meghan [assuming the HazBean alliance lasts], he will of course keep Pss. Anne and the Wessexes, but the Gloucesters and Kents will be quickly retired. Prince George will be about 10 by then, and five years after that, 15 and carefully taking a more public role. With their children out of infancy, William and Kate, now Prince and Princess of Wales, will be carrying out a much heavier programme so you have to factor that in. And ten years after that, Charles will be a doddering 95, all the Cambridge kids over twenty and taking on public roles, no one will give f.a. about what the Charels thinks, ditto the pain in the arse middle-aged Sussexes, the moment the Cambridge kids start dating and marrying, Harry and Meghan are out of the public's mind, and William and Kate heading for their coronations and nothing Harry and Meghan do, say, think, or feel will matter a damn, and Meghan can just thank her lucky stars she got onto the gravy train in time and for a life that indulged her taste for luxury, fame, social status, and public tolerance for her pretentious New Age twaddle, although I'm sure that instead of being grateful, she'll feel petulantly ill done by because she can't wear the kind of jewels that Kate can and has to curtsy to her Kate and William and public.

by Anonymousreply 117April 6, 2019 3:23 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 118April 6, 2019 3:27 PM

Great. More tediously pretentious twaddle from “Della”.

“And, anybody who denies that at least SOME of the DoS haters aren't motivated by bigotry is not to be taken seriously.” This again, dear?

No. The only people who shouldn’t be taken seriously are those who keep pushing this bullshit.

The only racism on these threads is from cunts who keep trying to accuse others of it. And I don’t care if you’re only “J’accuse-ing” SOME people, Della...those SOME people are not on these threads, so you have no good reason for continually bringing it up here.

by Anonymousreply 119April 6, 2019 3:28 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 120April 6, 2019 3:28 PM

Can't they fin another name for themselves - why hassle this poor guy. Such a cack handed pair

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 121April 6, 2019 3:36 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 122April 6, 2019 3:36 PM

R118 Hope she keeps the number handy.

by Anonymousreply 123April 6, 2019 3:42 PM

The Queen and Sarah Ferguson. She IS amused.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 124April 6, 2019 3:44 PM

"Bloody hell. She's trouble with a Capital T".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 125April 6, 2019 3:45 PM

Eugenie got married in October when the narcissist turned up in a maternity coat, she still hasn’t spawned so she can’t have been more than 3 months at the most. Who the fuck wears an outsize maternity coat when the week before they were wearing a lamb skin pencil skirt? Except of course the “vegan”...

She’s abhorrent. If Harry wanted to marry a woman of color there are so many classy, intelligent, accomplished women to choose from. He chose this. He’s the problem.

by Anonymousreply 126April 6, 2019 3:56 PM

R97 Guess that makes me wee bit older than 40, eh? Had you read further, you would have realized that I was describing the impact of the Cultural HISTORY of the Royal Family in Canada for MY Generation. You know, the one that gave you computers and classic rock.

As such, from that perspective alone, MM's behaviour since joining the Royal family is completely incomprehensible and appalling. And my taxes contribute to supporting her extravagances. Now it becomes infuriating.

Everyone thinks the world began when they were born. One day you realize it didn't. What a surprise that day is! Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Carry on.

by Anonymousreply 127April 6, 2019 3:58 PM

He married her because he wanted Her. WOC black/biracial aren't a clump of mass with one personality that can be replaced with another. They are individuals. Harry wanted Meghan. Deal with it.

by Anonymousreply 128April 6, 2019 4:00 PM

r119, I'll take my tediously pretentious twaddle over your half-a-bubble-off-plumb, way too much investment rantings any day.

Not that I owe you an accounting, but by SOME, at r100, I was including all of the DoS haters, where-evah.

by Anonymousreply 129April 6, 2019 4:03 PM

Camilla in Town&Country this month reminding us all she gives no fuck about protocal.An the dress,its fuschia and a nightmare.Why does she always look like she has on a housecoat?

You all drove off the Sussex social media account holder.Apparently he was getting thousands of hateful,racist disgusting messages every DAY.He posted a few,you brits are racist as fuk.Anyway he gave account up,closed shop and said its not worth it.You retards win again.Royalty is not just your obsessive hate about Megs/Harry.Royalty is the whole family.An like he put in in last message.If your disrespecting 1 royal because of petty jealouy. Why even follow royalty?You have no respect for the crown bitch.Fuck you(i loved that,tears were in my eyes)

EVERYTHING IS NOT ABOUT MEGHAN,so shut up

by Anonymousreply 130April 6, 2019 4:41 PM

M is black when she can use it . Why you think Doria was chosen to come to the Wedding . Look at me i’m black that she uses for manipulating public media . She only dated white man and only married white man . Even in university she was with a white fraternity . You don’t think its odd that the whole family on her fathers side and the whole family on her mothers side nobody was good enough to come to the Wedding . They where all bad ? But all these celebs where ok .

by Anonymousreply 131April 6, 2019 4:44 PM

Dear geriatric R127 public opinion did not ossify after your time in school. Only about 30% of Canadians actively want to keep the British monarch as head of state. Your generation may not be reflective of general public sentiment in the one Commonwealth country on which you seem to have information.

I stand by my comment at R61 that you claimed is mistaken in R64. The 2.3 billion people in the wider Commonwealth do not generally learn about the British royal family in their school system. That may have been the case 40 years ago, but that is no longer the case and hasn't been so for a long time. Commonwealth countries teach about their own government. In some cases the government may include the monarch. Commonwealth realms only account for 16 of the 53 Commonwealth countries. As R98 points out, the Commonwealth is diverse and in some places the royals are in the celebrity pages.

You clapped back at my comment and you're wrong.

Hate Meghan if you want to, but she has no great impact on people's lives. And she's easy to avoid if you choose the many media outlets that cover "serious" rather than celebrity news.

Like R10 I enjoy the distraction from politics that the BRF currently provide.

by Anonymousreply 132April 6, 2019 4:52 PM

WOW R130 are you off your meds ? Its all about MeMe ! I worked my whole life and never have seen someone so selfobsessed . She only cares about herself and Prince Frog and that little frog that is gonna be born are just accesories for her . Assets she can use to make money .

by Anonymousreply 133April 6, 2019 4:52 PM

R130 did you personally verify the geographic location of every negative tweet? No? Then shut the fuck up.

by Anonymousreply 134April 6, 2019 5:00 PM

To change the subject,, Camilla Thurlow has a very similar look to MM. Could she be the mystery lady in the elephant picture with Harry?

by Anonymousreply 135April 6, 2019 5:07 PM

Wait, what mystery?!

by Anonymousreply 136April 6, 2019 5:13 PM

R135 & R136 - there is no mystery. Harry brought Meghan to Africa for her birthday (they were dating). The woman in the elephant photo is Meghan. Why would you think that a attention whore grifter like Meghan would allow any other woman to steal her thunder on the Sussex Royal account???

by Anonymousreply 137April 6, 2019 5:34 PM

Below is excerpt dated June 28th, 1875 from one of Queen Victoria's journals. It describes a (worse than usual?) plague of frogs at Frogmore. Subsequent entries detail her consultation with a naturalist about the problem, but I don't have access to those.

"Tea at Frogmore, where the frogs were quite dreadful, making the grass look as if it were alive! The paths had to be swept over and over again."

by Anonymousreply 138April 6, 2019 5:36 PM

Lol, r138

by Anonymousreply 139April 6, 2019 5:47 PM

To answer an earlier question, many of us are fascinated with HazBean because of the disconnect between reality— both are noted underachievers relative to their opportunities, both are below average in looks and talent, neither seems to have basic life or social skills— and their apparently sky high opinion of themselves.

True, this textbook narcissism, but you so rarely see it play out so publicly. And there’s not even a little self awareness or good manners to keep them from fully expressing their awfulness.

by Anonymousreply 140April 6, 2019 5:53 PM

R130, CALM DOWN and space yourself, after your full stops. Kevin HAS NOT given up his Twitter account. He is actively being supported to keep it. And Camilla looked amazing in T&C you troll.

by Anonymousreply 141April 6, 2019 5:56 PM

Princess Michael of Kent is one of the most creative when it comes to wearing jewels in different ways. Here are some photos of her artistry.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 142April 6, 2019 6:30 PM

For being minor royals, the Kents have a lovely collection of baubles.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 143April 6, 2019 6:31 PM

She will be the downfall of the BRF. I guess that's a good thing.

by Anonymousreply 144April 6, 2019 6:59 PM

R143 - The Kents aren't actually that minor. Their father was the Queen's father's brother, and the collection of baubles is partly because the late HRH The Duchess of Kent, Pss. Marina of Greece, uwho like Princess Alice the Duchess of Gloucester, was given fine stuff from the collection by Queen Mary. I believe QM made sure each Duchess was left those things to pass on to their daughters-in-law. So the Gloucesters and Kents each inherited a suite of jewellery that the present Dukes' wives, sisters, and daughters can now wear.

I think if you google it, you will that that fringe tiara Pss. Michael is wearing, is the one Princess Marina wore when she married Prince George, Duke of Kent, youngest son of Queen Mary and King George V. I'm not sure if the current Duke's wife, Birgitte, ever wore it or how the wives divvied the stuff up amongst themselves.

by Anonymousreply 145April 6, 2019 7:03 PM

R144 - If the Windsors are noted for anything, it's an amazing capacity for survival. If the BRF allow it, Meghan will certainly put a dent in a certain kind of BRF, but Diana did far more damage and they survived. I think if the Windsors want to limit the damage, they can. I'm sure that part of their problem is limiting the damage without making themselves look worse. Refusing to allow a totally independent Sussex "court" and PR operation shows they are aware of the danger, and not giving them the same level of housing perks as the Cambridges have was another way of sending signals.

The arrival of kids always throws a wrench into relationships. It remains to be seen how the Sussex marriage goes over the next couple of years, and I would guess the BRF is waiting to see the same thing.

by Anonymousreply 146April 6, 2019 7:11 PM

I don't think Diana made the decadence and shamelessness of royal privilege as obvious to the masses as Meghan Markle does and will continue to do.

by Anonymousreply 147April 6, 2019 7:18 PM

[quote] Who says you have to get it, [R33]? You and that other twat don’t get to dictate what other people talk about...who on earth told you that you could? “Wah wah...I don’t get it”. So? Go find someone who gives a shit what you think.

[quote]You know there are endless forums with people slavishly adoring the cunt, right? Go there and demand that they cease & desist

This is a gay message board with a focus on celebrity gossip. That is why I am here. I come to royal family threads to read bitchy comments about the British royal family and to make bitchy comments of my own. But at some point this thread was taken over by refugees from other royal message boards who lack both insight and humor. If you feel so passionate about hating or loving this one woman, maybe you should start your own forum.

by Anonymousreply 148April 6, 2019 7:20 PM

R132, my point was that the Canadians probably have a closer bond with the British Monarchy than people in a Commonwealth country that is a Republic. In a Republic we have no reason to link a specific British monarch to our history or our present. In Canada, like Australia and New Zealand, they have a direct link to Queen Elizabeth and her family.

by Anonymousreply 149April 6, 2019 7:38 PM

Is that the African trip that was paid for by the elephant charity? I say, good of them to pony up.

by Anonymousreply 150April 6, 2019 7:45 PM

I read a book but MM’s so called meditation guru, Light Watkins. I loved the book. But why does MM make everything seeem so cheesy?

by Anonymousreply 151April 6, 2019 7:46 PM

The tiara Princess Pushy is wearing at R143 looks remarkably like the Queen Mary Fringe aka the Kokoshnik that HM and Anne wore on their wedding days. There are differences, though. I wonder if the Kent women refrained from wearing it for a while because it looks so similar to what the queen wore on her wedding day. I wonder which tiara Lady Gabriella will use.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 152April 6, 2019 7:59 PM

Luke Watkins teaches Vedic meditation, a style of meditation for high achievers with busy minds and no time to meditate.

by Anonymousreply 153April 6, 2019 8:00 PM

R153 - Harry's doing it because his wife does it. He's under her full control.

by Anonymousreply 154April 6, 2019 8:01 PM

R97 You can as usual lecture those of us who through no choice financially support the BRF on their visits to our countries but in this case you are wrong about the cost to we taxpayers.

When H&M toured Australia in October the cost to Australia was $A410,579:96. Flights and accommodation as well as food and incidentals accounted for more than half of that.

You’ll no doubt dispute the number but this was released by the Australian government under FOI.

We paid for this and I’d love to know what the return on the investment is. I’m sure you’ll elucidate me, though. Over to you.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 155April 6, 2019 8:09 PM

That is a hell of a lot of $.

Was it Oz where she almost flashed everyone in that beach cover up she wore as a dress and squatted down in?

by Anonymousreply 156April 6, 2019 8:13 PM

A fool and their money are soon parted so if stans want to throw away their money at Soho like they did buying made in China Ivanka shit it makes for a good laugh at their expense.

William much like in his choice of spouse is wise and cut off the putrid Sussex puss. They’ll bleat and bluster like any pest—but in the end HazBean are reduced to sad passing footnotes.

by Anonymousreply 157April 6, 2019 8:13 PM

R130 Hello Crazy! Still on your racist anti-racist nonsensical rant, I see! Keep it up - you’re fun!

by Anonymousreply 158April 6, 2019 8:17 PM

R130 OK Crazy let’s work on your latest bucket of word vomit:

Random CAPITALISATION just confirms that you’re unhinged (you wear lots of clashing patterns and bright colours, right?). Learn to use the space bar, even when you’re in a frantic hurry to pound out your thoughts. “Protocol”. I see that “an” for “and” is back - your signature, Crazy! Never lose it. “It’s” not “its”. “Brits”, “fuck”.

I lost my concentration (was laughing at you too much) in the second half of the second paragraph with “crown bitch / fuck you / tears in my eyes” - what are you trying to say there, Crazy?

Hope some of this helps - English is a demanding mistress, especially for someone special such as yourself.

by Anonymousreply 159April 6, 2019 8:34 PM

WTH is R130 on?

by Anonymousreply 160April 6, 2019 8:42 PM

I like the way all of R130’s posts start out just a little insane but then as he smashes out the words it becomes a crescendo of lunacy. Once he hits “post” he falls off his stool, weeping and reaching for his pills.

by Anonymousreply 161April 6, 2019 8:51 PM

R157 Even China was too high-end and expensive for Ivanka's rags - they were made in Ethiopia.

by Anonymousreply 162April 6, 2019 9:12 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 163April 6, 2019 9:52 PM

Check MeGains Insta, come on, it's hers, not hers, not the Sussexes as a royal couple. The Mandela post/picture......she's taking it away from the kids and directing it the British public. There, I've said it. Why can't she chill out with Bebe?

by Anonymousreply 164April 6, 2019 9:53 PM

This is a good read.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 165April 6, 2019 10:36 PM

I love the This is a Good Read Poster.

by Anonymousreply 166April 6, 2019 11:19 PM

The IG has the same lingo as the Tig. Corny and verbose.

by Anonymousreply 167April 6, 2019 11:20 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 168April 6, 2019 11:28 PM

R168 :"doctors" not "donors"

by Anonymousreply 169April 6, 2019 11:29 PM

Botswanaquisha

by Anonymousreply 170April 6, 2019 11:30 PM

I am the only American who matters.

The latest skank is forgettable trash, and Harry will be done soon enough with her.

by Anonymousreply 171April 6, 2019 11:33 PM

Ryan Murphy "Feud" is no more? i thought he was going to do a Charles and Diana episode!?

by Anonymousreply 172April 6, 2019 11:36 PM

Emily Andrews has once again incurred the wrath of the #sussexsquad. It's two days old, so apologies in advance if it was posted in the last thread. Nothing came up in a keyword search of this one.

[quote]And #sussexsquad! You’ve done so amazingly well in the awesome money you’ve all raised for #GlobalSussexBabyShower. Just think, £33k is about what you raised-you could have paid for #harryandmeghan’s babymoon instead! (Ps I donated to smart works, not to their hotel).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 173April 6, 2019 11:37 PM

As much as I can’t stand MM, I can’t criticize her for wanting her own choice of Ob/Gyn. A good compromise would be to have the Queen’s men on call/in the next room if things go bad (as they can do).

Refusing them solely for being “men in suits” is kind of stupid, and they should be allowed to look at scans and test results, etc. But there’s no reason they have to be poking in her vagina or observing her give birth.

by Anonymousreply 174April 6, 2019 11:41 PM

I see the Sussex and Cambridge PR teams are busy this weekend. There's a bitchy article about how awful Carole Middleton is to work for, which could be a carbon copy of the ones written about Meghan, and then there's the Meghan's Too Good For The Royal Doctors article.

I don't think it's profitable to decipher whether either one is accurate or whose PR leaked it or whether Carole and Meghan are birds of a feather - I think what's more to the point is that since Meghan arrived, the BRF finds itself entangled in a spiteful and cheesy PR war that tarnishes the brand and reduces them to the level of the Kardashians - the ony winners are the tabloids.

Meghan's entry into the BRF has caused incessant friction, engendered the PR war, and generated mostly negative press for the family as a whole - she's like itching powder poured down the back of the institution. They made a terrible mistake letting Harry marry her whilst retaining his position. They were too frightened of being seen as racist and classist.

They will pay heavily for that mistake for a long time.

by Anonymousreply 175April 6, 2019 11:42 PM

They're not men in suits because they'll be in their scrubs ready to offer assistance should it be needed. She's doing this because she wants to set herself apart as special of all the royal women, it's very on brand for her fake woke, naturopathic/ healing persona.

by Anonymousreply 176April 6, 2019 11:45 PM

The DM article about her birth is typically shady with vague sources. But this comment made me laugh:

'She can have a water birth in the pond at Frogmore with attendant nymphs for all I care. ribbit ribbit."

by Anonymousreply 177April 6, 2019 11:46 PM

R175 I agree. Imagine how much nastier and more damaging it will be if their marriage implodes.

by Anonymousreply 178April 6, 2019 11:54 PM

I went to medical school 20 years ago, and even back then about 3/4 of the OB-GYN residents were women. Where are they digging up these old male OB GYNs across the pond?

by Anonymousreply 179April 6, 2019 11:59 PM

It appears that the Duchess of Cambridge did not step up to host Meghan's second baby shower.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 180April 7, 2019 12:02 AM

Markel is not fucking friends with Victoria Beckham. This is bullshit, made-up friends on the spur of the moment.

by Anonymousreply 181April 7, 2019 12:05 AM

William the super spy.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 182April 7, 2019 12:26 AM

I reckon Markle’s planning an elective caesarean which is why she doesn’t want to pose on the Lindo Wing’s steps. (Doesn’t want the attention? Please). This bint isn’t going to risk having a sagging snatch by going au natural.

by Anonymousreply 183April 7, 2019 12:39 AM

Sorry, haven't read all the comments, but did we see the DM article about Doria being papped coming out of a building in LA called "Windsor Castle"? LMAO, I am now fully convinced Doria knows how the game is played, and gurl is ALL IN!

by Anonymousreply 184April 7, 2019 12:45 AM

R183 - If she had an elective Caesarean (which I doubt, it would make her look less womanly than Kate) she wouldn't be going home the eight hours later, like Kate, that's certain.

by Anonymousreply 185April 7, 2019 12:46 AM

I think Meghan wants to be recognized as original, different, unpredictable, unexpected, a pioneer. After all, folks, she's here to "change" things, ahem. So she may do some groundbreaking New Age birth experience which she will then tout on social media.

And let me extend my sincere warm wishes and blessings for a safe and happy birth. But then the real show will begin!

by Anonymousreply 186April 7, 2019 12:49 AM

Er yes, R185- that was my point.

And how does having a caesarean make anyone look “less womanly”? And I doubt she’d want anyone to know.

This place is deeply odd sometimes.

by Anonymousreply 187April 7, 2019 12:49 AM

A super fit yoga enthusiast shouldn’t even need an epidural, much less a c-section.

Unless she’s become flabby and out of shape (raises eyebrows) ???

by Anonymousreply 188April 7, 2019 12:50 AM

Wills and Catherine come across as grown ups. Dim and Me-Gain are like some Less Than Zero dissolute teens in comparison.

Still love that he barked NOT ALLOWED at his sil.

His training with security services sounds cool - Dim is always outclassed. His hatred for and resentment of his family seems so apparent now, but not long ago they were to be the family MeMe never had. Hmm?

by Anonymousreply 189April 7, 2019 12:58 AM

The Cambs will soon get divorced but not before council carol and her lackey.

The mids have been separated since 2014 and lived apart since then. Mike lives in the big house and car has a granny flat in KP. They will soon announce their divorce. Uncle gary will go to prison and expose the mids party piece drug front business. Soon.

I could tell you more but I don't want to ruin the surprise.

by Anonymousreply 190April 7, 2019 1:04 AM

R187 - I certainly don't think it makes anyone less womanly, but the pressures on women to prove themselves in this as in other arenas never really disappears. But that said, I doubt an elective Caesarian is necessary to avoid the sagging snatch: a few snips after the birth is the traditional and much less difficult way to ensure restored vaginal resiliency.

R190 - Yes, dear. Here are your meds, here's a glass of water, that's a good boy, now lie down and try to sleep.

by Anonymousreply 191April 7, 2019 1:06 AM

LOL, I'm imagining Meghan's new employee, the one who worked for Hillary, feverishly posting insults to Kate Middleton here on DL. We see you, honey!

by Anonymousreply 192April 7, 2019 1:14 AM

Hmm, so a negative piece about Carole Middleton. So this really is war, huh? So stupid. But so entertaining!

by Anonymousreply 193April 7, 2019 1:19 AM

I’m thinking that R190 was being ironic, but who can tell on these threads any more?

by Anonymousreply 194April 7, 2019 1:28 AM

There were negative stories about Carole Middleton years ago. They seemed to have stopped around the time George was born.

I don’t believe most who dislike MM are racist. I had no negative opinion of her until she threw her father under the bus. She’s shown her true colours since then.

by Anonymousreply 195April 7, 2019 1:29 AM

R194 - If R190 was being ironic, s/he has my apologies (if not s/he can fuck off back to Celebitchy), and you're right, it can be hard to tell on these threads.

by Anonymousreply 196April 7, 2019 1:31 AM

R190

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 197April 7, 2019 1:40 AM

i know this has already been posted, but we're getting in to some conflicts that I wish we could avoid. The role of the Royals was spelled out in 'The Crown'. Not like a series is a source of fact, but they actually are correct (more or less) in this case.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 198April 7, 2019 1:43 AM

R168 , it seems that many DM commenters are in now in #TeamPillow

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 199April 7, 2019 1:52 AM

R168 - The TIMES if you please has a piece up on the trolls questioning Meghan's pregnancy, and the TIMES also has an (I am sure) column up complaining that Meghan's "tiara wars" with the Queen were only Meghan trying to do things right.

The columnist has, of course, ignored the never denied story that Meghan's attitude of entitlement in the original Tiaragate cause the Queen to take Harry aside and tell him his intended needed attitude adjustment.

It is my belief that Meghan's PR team is probably working 24/7 loading up the cannons with fodder.

I can only imagine the rest of the BRF watching in disbelief and wondering if they should have sent the black Mercedes, after all.

by Anonymousreply 200April 7, 2019 2:13 AM

*the TIMES also has an (I am sure unintentionally) hilarious column up complaining that Meghan's "tiara wars" with the Queen were only Meghan trying to do things right.

R200

by Anonymousreply 201April 7, 2019 2:15 AM

Hi Sara Latham! You’re not really doing a good job if you’re so transparent that the DL has clocked you!

by Anonymousreply 202April 7, 2019 2:29 AM

In NZ my nieces and nephew still sing 'God Save the Queen' at school assemblies and part of their curriculum is British History including the Reformation so they definitely still do all that stuff. All the NZ magazines have royal gossip on the covers every week.

by Anonymousreply 203April 7, 2019 3:12 AM

Though I'm not a fan, Meghan doesn't know how the birth will go. She's older and is likely deeply apprehensive, not just about how the birth will go, but about how soon her body will snap back.

by Anonymousreply 204April 7, 2019 3:17 AM

They also got the day off school during the royal visit and spent the previous day making cards to give to Harry. When I was at school it was actually a bone of contention that we spent all our history curriculum studying the kings and queens of Britain and very little time on NZ history, but they have switched that around now. They still learn it though. I know because i help them with their homework every day.

by Anonymousreply 205April 7, 2019 3:17 AM

Have any of you DL ladies watched that marvellous show A Stictch in Time? In episode one they did the impact of Charles II on clothing after the Reformation. The show recreates clothing from each era using original methods and if possible, materials.

I'll bet they didn't teach THAT bit in NZ!

by Anonymousreply 206April 7, 2019 3:19 AM

Can someone type up a summary of the TIMES pieces from today, since its behind a paywall.

It's dueling pr teams at dawns, full pistols drawn. Negative article re Meg's ob-gyn choice, responded with neg article re Carole Middleton and her domineering boss lady ways. Carole imo gets a pass because she actually OWNS the company in question, whereby Megs only works as part of ensemble in the BRF and gets paid even if she doesn't show up for work.

The Ob-Gyn thing is weird. Her body, her choice of course but why re-invent the wheel? if she goes with her own medical team they have to pay full price, and cough up big bucks. The coming weeks should be interesting.

by Anonymousreply 207April 7, 2019 3:21 AM

R207, the time what appeared to be padding fell to close to her knees (red/purple outfit outing) amplified rumors that she may be using a surrogate. Thus avoiding the use of the royal gynos.

Who knows with these 2 what the real deal is? Perhaps it will become more clear in time?

by Anonymousreply 208April 7, 2019 3:42 AM

There is no way she is using a surrogate. Her face and her ass both got fat. The kind of fat a woman gets when she's pregnant

by Anonymousreply 209April 7, 2019 3:51 AM

[quote] The Ob-Gyn thing is weird. Her body, her choice of course but why re-invent the wheel? if she goes with her own medical team they have to pay full price, and cough up big bucks.

That's not true. The Queen's doctors wouldn't actually be delivering the baby. They'd just be watching. Contrary to the bullshit the media is reporting about these doctors saving Sophie Wessex's life, they didn't do one damned thing. She was bleeding out and was transferred to another hospital, whose doctor's saved her life. Again, these two were just standing around. Another dr was delivering the baby. And Meghan will be using the same dr's she's been seeing. So a whole new team of drs will not have to be brought in, so the price will be the same.

It's an NHS hospital, so why are you even bringing up cost? Kate is the one who insisted on having her baby in the private Lido Wing which costs about £10,000

Princess Diana did not appreciate having to have the Senior Dr around when she was giving birth. She also HATED the fact that he had to examine her to make sure she was a virgin before she got married

by Anonymousreply 210April 7, 2019 4:06 AM

I thought Prince Phillip conducted the virgin examination?

by Anonymousreply 211April 7, 2019 4:10 AM

This whole bullshit about the Queen's doctors having to be there is some ancient tradition where there had to be witnesses because the Queen or the Queen Consort always gave birth at home in a palace and evidently weren't trusted not to swap out the baby or to fake the birth entirely

It's 2019. Not 1719. There's no need for witnesses. And giving birth is a private thing. No woman wants a bunch of strangers around watching

And it's still not official where Meghan is giving birth. The Palace has not confirmed anything

by Anonymousreply 212April 7, 2019 4:11 AM

[quote] It is understood that meetings to discuss the birth will be held as the due date approaches, with the baby expected next month.

So she isn't due until next month? Has she been sticking her gut out, and padding since 8 weeks?

by Anonymousreply 213April 7, 2019 4:18 AM

Sure seems like it, R213.

by Anonymousreply 214April 7, 2019 4:32 AM

What about Doria or Thomas for her Mother, Father and Brother? No homage to the American gene pool?

by Anonymousreply 215April 7, 2019 4:40 AM

r213 I don't think she's using a surrogate, but I do think she has been padding since Eugenie's wedding. Why, I have no idea except to think she is so hungry for attention that padding and under-cupping to the point where it looks like she's reaching for her crotch in public both seem like great ideas to her.

by Anonymousreply 216April 7, 2019 4:40 AM

Me-Gain is heading into her 14th month of pregnancy.

by Anonymousreply 217April 7, 2019 4:41 AM

What the hell is that stupid cupping all about? Way down by her cooch.

by Anonymousreply 218April 7, 2019 4:45 AM

If its a girl it will be Shanequa Elizabeth If it's a boy it will Nipsey Hussell Phillip

by Anonymousreply 219April 7, 2019 5:24 AM

It may be 2019, but she still can’t be trusted not to fake a birth, so it’s smart of the Queen to insist on having her people observe.

by Anonymousreply 220April 7, 2019 5:25 AM

Meghan Diana Michelle.

by Anonymousreply 221April 7, 2019 5:26 AM

Well the Queen's own birth was observed by several officials, and at the time, the Queen Mother was in the same position as Meghan is in now, so I don't see how Meghan could demand no observation.

If it's a RF rule and she refuses it, I think it will give enormous support to the Surrogate-theorists, and the kid will forever be trailed by whispers of being from a surrogate.

Add that to the fact that even now Harry is trailed by some whispers of being illegitimate, people will end up speculating that the kid isn't a royal at all.

by Anonymousreply 222April 7, 2019 5:32 AM

[R141]....Camilla looked horrible in Town&Country dear

The comments on it said why does her breasts appear to sit on her hips.The pictures were horrible,the dress not appropriate at all.She usually dresses WAYYY better.....but if you liked it. You too must be shaped like jabba the hut....carry on freak

by Anonymousreply 223April 7, 2019 5:37 AM

R222 to be fair, the QM was NOT in the same position as her husband's elder brother was a childless bachelor. If things had gone the "proper" way, Liz would never have become Queen. But destiny will not be denied.

by Anonymousreply 224April 7, 2019 6:02 AM

R165 's "good read" is really good and no one has been discussing it.

Link repeated for simplification.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 225April 7, 2019 6:11 AM

[R224]

You don't think the Duchess of Windsor would have produced an heir....?I see Wallis finding a baby somewhere if she had become a Royal.Even if she had to buy it...

by Anonymousreply 226April 7, 2019 6:15 AM

[quote] and then there's the Meghan's Too Good For The Royal Doctors article

The article "forgets" to mention she will be using NHS doctors. But of course the tabloids want everyone to think Meghan is hiring some super expensive private doctors (which is actually what the Queen's doctors are). Meghan will be using the actual doctors she has been seeing for the past 8 months

by Anonymousreply 227April 7, 2019 6:18 AM

And once again something someone made up in Datalounge gets repeated as fact a couple of posts later.

Royal births used to require witnesses. The last time that this happened was the birth was of Prince Charles which was witnessed by the Home Secretary. In 1948. He was in the Palace although most likely not standing between the stirrups checking out the then Princess Elizabeth’s snatch.

by Anonymousreply 228April 7, 2019 6:34 AM

HRHCamillaBlog has pictures up from Bermuda trip....Charles and Camilla look good together

by Anonymousreply 229April 7, 2019 6:37 AM

Seems they've changed the witnessing of the births from the Home Sec to the Queen's official doctors. After all I hardly think it's an accident that every Royal birth since Charles' has been attended by the Queen's own doctors. It's obvious they stand as official witnesses. For everyone but Meghan, that is.

by Anonymousreply 230April 7, 2019 6:42 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 231April 7, 2019 6:56 AM

Uncle Gary looks like he’d throw a mean fuck. I wouldn’t mind a night or two on the gear with him at Maison de Bang Bang!

by Anonymousreply 232April 7, 2019 7:00 AM

Back in October, when she was still going to give birth in Lindo Wing, it has been said that Meghan has already picked up her birthing team that included two obstetricians, three midwives, two anaestesiologists, four surgical staff, etc. Those people reportedly were told abstain of drinking, not to take vacation in the months leading to birth and so on. Therefore, something must have happened for Meghan to change her plans and drop the previous team.

by Anonymousreply 233April 7, 2019 7:01 AM

^^ Or maybe that whole story was bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 234April 7, 2019 7:09 AM

R233 why would she pick all those folk when she’s giving birth to a pillow?

by Anonymousreply 235April 7, 2019 7:24 AM

The comments to that article at R231 are hilarious. “Oh Wills what have you done,” “I wonder how long it will take William to realise what damage he made to the House of Windsor with his choice of a bride,” “The Middletons make Fergie look like a paragon of virtue.” Maybe, if Meghan is lucky, Bea marries her boyfriend and he wil provide enough reasons to hate him to take the focus off Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 236April 7, 2019 7:25 AM

I read she is gonna give a second babyshower here in Britain . Well it didn’t cost enough the first one ? This will be for all her Soho friends (the minor celebs ) !

by Anonymousreply 237April 7, 2019 7:51 AM

True r236, except that there are only 189 comments on that 2013 article. It's rare to see a single Harkle article in the DM with less that 2000 negative comments - the Meghan Lino Wing story from today has 5.8 thousand and will still be up for hours yet.

The dislike taken by the public to Meghan is on several orders of magnitude greater than the degree of dislike taken to Kate before she had proven herself - and seen in places like the Telegraph comments, where one never saw (or sees now) a cross word about Kate.

I'm not sure the two situations are even comparable.

by Anonymousreply 238April 7, 2019 7:57 AM

The two situations are entirely comparable. Meghan is just more notorius than Kate. She is an American. She’s an actress. She has a social media presence. It makes sense why the news about her generate more traffic, but the underlying sentiment is very much the same as it used to be with Kate.

by Anonymousreply 239April 7, 2019 8:06 AM

Markle has the weirdest fucking face shape. Her face sucks.

by Anonymousreply 240April 7, 2019 8:26 AM

Yes r239, the sentiment of "I'm not sure about this Kate" or I'm not sure about this Sophie", or even "Kate's awaful" or "Sophie's awful" were seen, but they did not form the mutli-thousand- strong tsunami-level of loathing that appear every day now in the comment sections on what we are seeing with Meghan. Not even close.

Sorry, think what you like, but in truth there really is no comparison.

by Anonymousreply 241April 7, 2019 8:26 AM

Maybe I'm reading too much into the Daily Mail's use of subliminal shade..... In the article already posted about Markle not allowing the Queen's doctor's to attend the birth, The Mail have gone with the a pic taken on International Women's Day... the very day when the 'bump ' was seen to sway back and forth by someone in the crowd, who filmed it. Of ALL the millions of pics of 'SohoBebe Bump To Be 'for The Mail to choose....

by Anonymousreply 242April 7, 2019 8:38 AM

Wow

The Sun is reporting Eduaurdo Mozzi has moved into Princess Beatrice royal apartment this morning.An wedding bells are forthcoming.

I thought he was a millionaire?

by Anonymousreply 243April 7, 2019 8:54 AM

At a party last night MM cropped up as a topic - the level of dislike, disgust and revulsion was surprising and unanimous, from people I would never have expected to care about the RF. She is attracting attention for all the wrong reasons. If not for the Brexit chaos there would be more eyes on her shenanigans and more voices expressing dissent. Anecdotal evidence suggests that her behaviour will not continue to be tolerated by taxpayers.

by Anonymousreply 244April 7, 2019 8:56 AM

I am in Italy at the moment, and surprisingly the BRF are the lead stories and on the covers of all the Italian gossip mags, exactly as in the UK, and have been for quite a long while apparently. Yet I have never heard any Italian express an interest or opinion about them, but there must be some interest, or they would not sell magazines. I did hear that during tampongate, the Italians called HRH Charles "Il Tamponcino" - Little Mr Tampon.

by Anonymousreply 245April 7, 2019 9:06 AM

I wonder if SohoBébé will play the [italic]Maternity Coat at Wedding[/italic] game and slither out on someone else's day. A few that are ripe for the commandeering:

APRIL

8 — Buddha's birthday

11 — signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1968

22 — Earth Day

27 — Coretta Scott King's birthday

MAY

1 — May Day/International Workers' Day

4 — International Stand Up to Bullying Day

21 — World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development

25 — Africa Day

25-31 — Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories

Actually, I'm surprised that the International Day of Mine Awareness (4th April) came and went.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 246April 7, 2019 9:08 AM

Indeed, r246, except you forgot the most likely day of all:

April 21st - The Queen's Birthday

by Anonymousreply 247April 7, 2019 9:14 AM

Interesting, r244. Can you elaborate on what they said? Also interested in whather they were urbanites or country types? Gaylings or straights? Old or young? No need to expand if you don't want to but I'd be interested to know just out of curiousity.

by Anonymousreply 248April 7, 2019 9:24 AM

Ugh! Of course I did, R247. While Buddha's birthday is the stuff of dreams, it's just too close.

The 21st it is. Plus, just think of the narrative that will surely be floated: Villainous Kate, in a devilish plot to divert attention from the Queen, tried desperately to give birth to Charlotte on the 21st, only to miss by two weeks. Then she tried to have Louis on the 21st and missed by two days. Ha ha, what a failure. Meghan didn't even have to to try! The Queen chose to share her birthday with SohoBébé because Meghan is her favorite.

by Anonymousreply 249April 7, 2019 9:35 AM

r246 Exactly! I can see it now....

But, seriously, it's being floated that SohoBebe will come via elective Caesarian, and if that's the case, then she gets to choose the day. If so, I really do entirely expect it to be on the Queen's birthday. Seriously - Meghan really is the sort of person to do something that tacky and self-glorifying.

by Anonymousreply 250April 7, 2019 9:49 AM

R243 Hi Crazy!

Space after the end of a sentence. “And” not “an”.

by Anonymousreply 251April 7, 2019 10:10 AM

Charles and Camilla always look so relaxed when on a trip abroad . They always having a good time these two .

by Anonymousreply 252April 7, 2019 10:36 AM

Will the birth be taped and snips shown on social media?

Stilettos in Stir-Ups!

by Anonymousreply 253April 7, 2019 10:37 AM

Will the baby be called princess or prince? Officially?

by Anonymousreply 254April 7, 2019 10:38 AM

Hairz will take a pic of the baby crowning, and THAT will be the picture you'll see everywhere: mugs, t-shirts, and balloons.

by Anonymousreply 255April 7, 2019 10:41 AM

No, R254.

by Anonymousreply 256April 7, 2019 11:03 AM

The Queen's birthday also falls on Easter Sunday, so that would be just perfect for Ginger Jesus to make his entrance from Sparkle's cavernous tomb.

by Anonymousreply 257April 7, 2019 12:13 PM

Oh, the Queen's birthday seems like just the kind of thing The High Priestess of Pettiness would do.

by Anonymousreply 258April 7, 2019 12:36 PM

April 23 she gets St.George's day AND Shakespeare's birth and death day.

by Anonymousreply 259April 7, 2019 12:40 PM

R210 she didn’t undergo a virginity test. That has been debunked. Her uncle said she was a virgin.

by Anonymousreply 260April 7, 2019 12:43 PM

R200, ypu don’t load cannons with fodder, you shoot cannons at fodder.

by Anonymousreply 261April 7, 2019 12:48 PM

R260, on what earth would an uncle say his niece was a virgin??? That is totally fucked up.

by Anonymousreply 262April 7, 2019 12:50 PM

Lol.

by Anonymousreply 263April 7, 2019 12:54 PM

Meghan stans making sense of the refusal of the royal doctors .......

@Pork_Nocker Follow Follow @Pork_Nocker More Replying to @CarlaChamorros The Queens doctors have no experience with delivering a biracial baby. It would be tempting faith on the part of Meghan Markle to put her trust in an experienced team.

7:30 PM - 6 Apr 2019

by Anonymousreply 264April 7, 2019 1:03 PM

Yes, the virginity test is a complete myth, just like branding 19yearold Lady Diana as a virgin. Unlikely for a 19year old and completely unnecessary in 1980. all that mattered was that she didn‘t have an exhusband or highly publicised exboyfriends who could publish tell-all’s. That‘s where the virgin claim came from, making sure everybody who said different would come across as an asshole lying about a saintly virgin.

by Anonymousreply 265April 7, 2019 1:03 PM

Any gyno worth their salt would take one look at Smegz's cooter and be horrified at the sheer amount of traffic it's seen. Like O'Hare Airport.

by Anonymousreply 266April 7, 2019 1:08 PM

R264 is that comment for real??

If so, it takes “stupid” to an entirely new level.

by Anonymousreply 267April 7, 2019 1:19 PM

R209 The same thing happens when a non-pregnant woman gains 15-20 pounds by consuming more calories.

by Anonymousreply 268April 7, 2019 1:29 PM

R266 Every gyno worth their salt rolls his/her eyes at comments like this. If you know nothing about pussy, shut your silly trap.

by Anonymousreply 269April 7, 2019 1:34 PM

Make me.

by Anonymousreply 270April 7, 2019 1:39 PM

I just might, penis-breath.

by Anonymousreply 271April 7, 2019 1:41 PM

Uncle Gary was handsome when he was young. It must be hard to lose your hair and your looks no matter how much money you possess.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 272April 7, 2019 1:45 PM

R272 Pippa looks like Grandma.

by Anonymousreply 273April 7, 2019 2:01 PM

Very very very excited about Beatrice's reported plans to marry the scoundrel.. Imagine their big, Eurotrashtastic wedding. Imagine Meg and Edo assessing each other.

by Anonymousreply 274April 7, 2019 2:15 PM

I can't get excited about penis breath. If that's all you have, I'm out.

by Anonymousreply 275April 7, 2019 2:44 PM

I wouldn't mind going behind the scenes of the British Intelligence community to learn how they operate. What a great assignment for Will.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 276April 7, 2019 3:18 PM

Lovely photo of The Queen in her riding attire.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 277April 7, 2019 3:20 PM

Baby girl name predictions.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 278April 7, 2019 3:20 PM

Baby boy name predictions.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 279April 7, 2019 3:21 PM

Elizabeth and Philip visiting Niagara Falls.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 280April 7, 2019 3:22 PM

I cannot now UNSEE this photo.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 281April 7, 2019 3:24 PM

What's that between Fergie and Eugenie?

by Anonymousreply 282April 7, 2019 3:25 PM

How can Megs pass up all of this attention?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 283April 7, 2019 3:26 PM

Compared with Meghan, I predict that Bea's husband will look like a model spouse (at least for the first years of marriage.)

What New Age, trendy, "right-on" antics are we to expect from the second baby shower hosted by Meghan at Frogmore? What if she invites men too, as is the trend. Kate and Will may have no choice but to make an appearance.

by Anonymousreply 284April 7, 2019 3:26 PM

OMFG. Can you picture William at a baby shower for Smegz???

by Anonymousreply 285April 7, 2019 3:28 PM

Young Meghan and Harry holding babies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 286April 7, 2019 3:29 PM

Don't know if this story is true or not but hynobirthing does sound like something that might interest the Two Hippies of Frogmore.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 287April 7, 2019 3:31 PM

R281 LOL. They look like four middle-class women after the reception of a cheap destination wedding on the beach.

by Anonymousreply 288April 7, 2019 3:32 PM

A five million pound fund to buy clothes? That will go down well in the land of Brexit. Well, Meghan is certainly spending like mad.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 289April 7, 2019 3:33 PM

Meg has had the lion's share of attention this past year, but after the birth of the baby, that'll be it for a while. We have coming up: Euge hopefully having a baby, maybe Kate having another one, the Lady Gabriela wedding, and (please God) Bea's wedding.

by Anonymousreply 290April 7, 2019 3:34 PM

Wasteful Meghan.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 291April 7, 2019 3:35 PM

R285 Will hastily fills up his date book.

by Anonymousreply 292April 7, 2019 3:35 PM

Exactly, R292!

by Anonymousreply 293April 7, 2019 3:36 PM

Meghan through the years.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 294April 7, 2019 3:38 PM

Meghan's "beauty evolution" (aka surgery/enhancements etc...).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 295April 7, 2019 3:39 PM

She had good work done.

by Anonymousreply 296April 7, 2019 3:40 PM

Meghan will give birth to the anti-christ. It will be a "girl" (a trans) and will be the new leader of the coming scam one world government and religion.

by Anonymousreply 297April 7, 2019 3:40 PM

Her thirst for fame and glory makes her the perfect vessel.

by Anonymousreply 298April 7, 2019 3:42 PM

Oh my, R297!

Will they have the poor thing castrated a la J@zz?

Sounds entertaining for sure.

by Anonymousreply 299April 7, 2019 3:42 PM

Pity she's so disfigured, mangled and burnt on the inside.

by Anonymousreply 300April 7, 2019 3:42 PM

R210 - Oh please. The only tests Diana underwent were fertility tests, because she was marrying the Heir Apparent. No one particularly gave a damn about her being a virgin, per se, they just didn't want scandals coming out from previous lovers. And given the fact that she was dying to marry Chalres and had been pursuing that aim from the time she was fifteen, buried to her eyebrows in Barbarta Cartland novels, she cheerfully did whatever she had to do to get where she wanted, including the fertility tests and standing there at the engagment photocall listening to Charles say, "Whatever 'in love' means" as he basically told the world he'd finally simply caved in and married a suitable girl with his fingers crossed behind his back.

The Lindo is one of the best known quality maternity places in the country. Pss. Anne used it, Sarah Ferguson used it, Diana used it. It's top notch. Yes, it's expensive. But it's also very, very good.

by Anonymousreply 301April 7, 2019 3:43 PM

The Sussex pair aren't hiring a nanny because Grandma Doria is going to move into Frogmore and do all of the childcare work for them.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 302April 7, 2019 3:44 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 303April 7, 2019 3:47 PM

R295 - She not only had the nose narrowed, she had the end lifted to create more space above her upper lip. Those and the hair-straightening gave her enough racial ambiguity to get farther in the entertainment world, which wasn't 15 years ago where it is today, and turned her from an L.A. girl who looked like tens of thousands of other girls in L.A., into a reasonably pretty upgraded version of those tens of thousands of L.A. girls. And she's aging badly already.

by Anonymousreply 304April 7, 2019 3:48 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 305April 7, 2019 3:49 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 306April 7, 2019 3:52 PM

R261 - LOL. I stand corrected.

by Anonymousreply 307April 7, 2019 3:53 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 308April 7, 2019 3:54 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 309April 7, 2019 3:55 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 310April 7, 2019 3:57 PM

R254 - No. They will "officially" be called the Earl of Dumbarton if a boy, and Lady Diana/Alice/Victoria/Elizabeth/Alexandra Mountbatten-Windsor. If the Queen hasn't issued Letters Patent granting them HRH status by now, then they're unlikely to get Prince/Princess status until she dies and Charles becomes King. At that time, they will automatically step up to HRH status as grandchildren of the Sovereign in the male line. However, usually in those cases the kids just go on as they were styled and titled when born, like Prince Edward's kids, who are also "technically" HRHs but their father chose to have them go on with their minor subsidiary titles.

Automatic Prince/Princess (HRH) stops with the grandchildren of the Sovereign, unless they are in the direct line of success in the male line, like William's kids. The Queen issued Letters Patent by the time Kate was past the first trimester with her first child granting all William's children HRHs.

Harry is sixth in line. There's no need to create a couple more HRHs for the British public to grovel to.

by Anonymousreply 311April 7, 2019 3:59 PM

R310 - Charles still hasn't learned to keep his loose lips shut. I hope he dies before the Queen so Britain, if it MUST have a Sovereign, can have one with more self-control and less impulses to Change The World. It would also send the Sussexes quickly to the back benches where they belong.

But I suppose that's too much to hope for.

by Anonymousreply 312April 7, 2019 4:01 PM

Trump is going to glory in the gratitude and glory of our World War II boys who died and sacrificed to save the world. This makes me sick. My father would despise this man. He and all the boys on the B-17s, on the shores of D- Day, all the POW's -- deserve thanks on their 75th year anniversary. But it will be Trump who glories in their sacrifice. This cannot happen! Ugh!

by Anonymousreply 313April 7, 2019 4:11 PM

R244 - "Anecdotal evidence suggests that her behaviour will not continue to be tolerated by taxpayers."

As the benighted British taxpayer has absolutely no say in whether or not they wish to continue tolerating her behaviour, and no power to stop "tolerating" it, I'd be interested to hear your solution for said taxpayers.

The British taxpayer is contributing to her lifestyle, has renovated her home, pays for her security, and is also paying £140,000 p.a. for her new American Communications Director, with offices in Buckingham Palace.

Exactly how would the British taxpayer exert any power whatsoever over its Royal Family continuing to allow Meghan Markle to function as a "representative" of the monarchy and the nation, complete with million dollar wardrobe, luxury home, lots of staff, and the obsequious deference royal Dooks and Dookesses receive as a matter of course?

What should we do? Show up at Windsor with pitchforks and torches? Start witholding a certain amount of money from Inland Revenue in protest at supporting the L.A. grifter and Dimwit?

It's too late, mate. The moment that engagement was announced, the British taxpayer was for it. And there's isn't a damned thing we can do about it.

by Anonymousreply 314April 7, 2019 4:12 PM

Meg is so happy to have a social media outlet again. She’s posting up a storm on Insta, and the captions definitely sound like her.

by Anonymousreply 315April 7, 2019 4:15 PM

R215 - I guess her gratitude and relief by giving up her own SM was a lie as well.

by Anonymousreply 316April 7, 2019 4:20 PM

For those in UK this is a good series about Windsor Castle from 2005

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 317April 7, 2019 4:22 PM

R295 The before looked better, she had a younger looking face. What I can't get over is her masculine jawline that she had subsequently made smaller with botox injections. Have a feeling her jawline is dominant trait that will show up in her daughter.

by Anonymousreply 318April 7, 2019 4:35 PM

Edo needs to marry Bea. Two smarmy grifters in one generation will keep the BRF a viable entertainment industry all their own. Edu's face looks very punchable to me, insincerity just oozes out of him similar to Meghan. Hoping that down the line they'll eventually hook up with each other and create shit storm of unseen proportions.

by Anonymousreply 319April 7, 2019 4:39 PM

Well well well. The Grifter has been caught out, and removed the picture of her and Prince Halfwit working on the collar of an elephant. Because it wasn't her! It was this lady......(swipe the pics on the link ).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 320April 7, 2019 4:42 PM

R319 LOL. As the dour Melanchoy Dane said, "'tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.'"

by Anonymousreply 321April 7, 2019 4:43 PM

*demmit - "Melancholy"

by Anonymousreply 322April 7, 2019 4:43 PM

R320 - No!!!!!!!! Well, that IS delicious!

by Anonymousreply 323April 7, 2019 4:44 PM

I THOUGHT that looked too tall, even from the crouched position, to be the prince's wart.

by Anonymousreply 324April 7, 2019 4:47 PM

I wouldn’t be surprised they used anothers woman picture with that elephant thing . Grifters galore these two . Under the false flag of humanitarian and nature conservatists . I stated I worked my whole life and never met a woman like M but I guess the streets of H’wood are full of woman and men like her .

by Anonymousreply 325April 7, 2019 5:04 PM

R320, I want to believe that is true because I believe MM would do such a thing. However, the woman in your photographs is sort of a dirty blond/light brown person and the crouched down woman in the picture with Harry and the elephant (which is still on the SussexRoyal insta) has long black coarse hair. Hmm. Not sure what to believe!

by Anonymousreply 326April 7, 2019 5:07 PM

Uncle Gary was hawt. So is James.

by Anonymousreply 327April 7, 2019 5:07 PM

So Bea will become an insta-stepmother to a 2 year old. I suppose Prince Louis could use a playmate. And Charles would approve, as Louis' new playmate is an ethnic minority and representative of the UK's diversity. Maybe the young Mozzi could become the next poet laureate.

by Anonymousreply 328April 7, 2019 5:10 PM

R326 - I thought the same thing, that the hair flowing under the back of the cap looked like more like Meghan's hair. If the photo is still up, my guess is that this was a smear attempt, and I say this as someone with massive contempt for Meghan. I just also happen to have massive contempt for false smearing.

So - does anyone know yet if this story has legs?

by Anonymousreply 329April 7, 2019 5:14 PM

Meet the mother of Bea's future stepson, Dara Huang.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 330April 7, 2019 5:15 PM

Dara is actually an accomplished woman who comes from an equally accomplished family. What the hell was she doing having a kid with Edo? Edo dumped her for Bea who is not as accomplished nor as attractive. Could be only one thing, status.

by Anonymousreply 331April 7, 2019 5:19 PM

R326 and R329, she's now removed the picture (s) from the Sussex Royal Instagram. I've just had a little float around some of the royal family gossip site ( NOT RFG, though) and it is being suggested that she added the dark hair using photoshop. Which I do know she's done before on The Tig, when she used a ginger filter on one of her friends, I think to make her audience believe it was Harry. I've just found a copy of the pulled down Insta pic, and I think I agree , she's added the dark hair to the picture. BUT, she was very clever as she didn't STATE that it was actually her in the picture. BUT she led people on, and her prose suggested it was her.

by Anonymousreply 332April 7, 2019 5:22 PM

R326 and R329, she's now removed the picture (s) from the Sussex Royal Instagram. I've just had a little float around some of the royal family gossip site ( NOT RFG, though) and it is being suggested that she added the dark hair using photoshop. Which I do know she's done before on The Tig, when she used a ginger filter on one of her friends, I think to make her audience believe it was Harry. I've just found a copy of the pulled down Insta pic, and I think I agree , she's added the dark hair to the picture. BUT, she was very clever as she didn't STATE that it was actually her in the picture. BUT she led people on, and her prose suggested it was her.

by Anonymousreply 333April 7, 2019 5:23 PM

R332, sounds like she was challenged about it, then. Not by the Mexiteers, but maybe someone known to the doctor lady ( vet lady? ) herself.

by Anonymousreply 334April 7, 2019 5:23 PM

Mexiteers, lololol!! Love it!!

by Anonymousreply 335April 7, 2019 5:24 PM

R330 and R331 Oh Bea, poor Bea! One look at her boyfriend's ex should tell Bea that he's not dating her for her looks, charm, and fantastic sexual appeal. That woman is his real speed - Bea is just a stepping-stone to status. Edo and Meghan should get along splendidly, they'll understand each other perfectly.

This is like Athina Onassis and Thierry Roussel, the good looking playboy she had the daughter with, while he kept the beautiful Nordic blonde mistress on the back burner and I think later married her.

Christ, the BRF really has turned into the Kardashians.

by Anonymousreply 336April 7, 2019 5:24 PM

The picture is still there. The caption doesn't say it's Meghan, but the photo and the first (sketchy) comment leads you to believe it is her.

by Anonymousreply 337April 7, 2019 5:25 PM

R337 - Which prose, of course, the DM and other tabloids picked up and when THEY ran the photo SAID it was Harry and Meghan. Of course, the tabs could get another story out of this by issuing a correction and stating they took the description at face value as stating if not in so many words that it was Meghan and Harry.

But will they?

by Anonymousreply 338April 7, 2019 5:28 PM

Yes the picture is still there, at the post where hey were at the David Attenborough event. And she never mentioned poor David's name.

by Anonymousreply 339April 7, 2019 5:28 PM

Whoops I stand corrected, the pic IS still there, sorry peeps. Just looking at it, now. But I must not get obsessed about it.

by Anonymousreply 340April 7, 2019 5:30 PM

R328, Wolfie is not ethnic enough in the eyes of cray SJW/ see racism everywhere people who make up sizable number of Meghan fans. From few photos of Edo's son, he has very light coloring and looks more white than Asian. A lot of us Eurasians look that way, oddly enough you'd think dark hair Asian genes would be more dominant but not often the case.

by Anonymousreply 341April 7, 2019 5:30 PM

R337 Sounds like a correction the DM would gleefully make.

by Anonymousreply 342April 7, 2019 5:33 PM

R335 Athina is his daughter.

by Anonymousreply 343April 7, 2019 5:43 PM

R343 - Right - Christina was the mother. But you got my drift I hope . . .

R335

by Anonymousreply 344April 7, 2019 5:48 PM

I fear Beatrice will go the Cristina Onassis route in the end. Just physically. There's not serious dosh, obviously.

by Anonymousreply 345April 7, 2019 6:05 PM

Megsy might set her sights on Bea's bf.

by Anonymousreply 346April 7, 2019 6:09 PM

The article about Me-again's mother bringing posters from the old Toronto pad to decorate the Frog cottage and make it "homey" , is that for real or another not so subtle dig? Hasn't the queen offered them a selection from the royal art collection?

by Anonymousreply 347April 7, 2019 6:10 PM

What posters would Megsy have? What would her equivalent of say, Adam Ant, be? Ha. They can't have been at Toronto, as that pad was a fully furnished rental. Funny, I remember Megsy's PR putting the tosh out about a selection of royal art. So maybe the DM are taking the pee. They are supposed to be sitting on something incredibly damaging, after all, and have been for a while. If Enty is to be believed, of course.

by Anonymousreply 348April 7, 2019 6:22 PM

Just given my age away, retires gracefully....

by Anonymousreply 349April 7, 2019 6:22 PM

R341 I am approaching the issue of diversity through Prince Charles' eyes. And yes, a half Asian toddler with an Italian father (even with blond highlights) would be considered quite racially diverse by our bonnie Prince Charlie.

by Anonymousreply 350April 7, 2019 6:30 PM

R1 - Since Meghan is the boss in the family, I think she'll have the final say in the Sohobébé's name. If the Queen discourages the couple from using Diana as a first name, she'll probably defy her wishes and do it anyway. Neither Meghan nor Harry are deep thinkers so they wouldn't think that calling a child after the iconic but deeply flawed Diana may not be a good idea. Talk about someone to live up to - the good, the bad and the ugly! Poor kid.

I can't see Meghan going for old-fashioned names like Albert/Alfred/Arthur/Adelaide (Australian city)/Matilda (Australian song Waltzing Matilda).

For a girl, I think she's going to pick something trendy or even a nature/word name which would be more in line with her modern, global "brand" aspirations (Stella/Maya/Olivia/Violet/Iris/Felicity/Verity). If they do go the more traditional route, my guess would be Alice, Victoria or Caroline (a female equivalent of Charles).

For a boy, I think she'll go for something a little more traditional because studies have shown that most parents are more creative when it comes to names for daughters and are more conservative when naming males. I haven't really given much thought to boys names because I've always thought she was having a girl.

by Anonymousreply 351April 7, 2019 6:38 PM

^ don't know what the hell happened with the spaces in my post above.

by Anonymousreply 352April 7, 2019 6:39 PM

From The Sunday Times, no less! ( I've copied the article, blooming paywall)

Trolls Cast Doubt on Meghan's Pregnancy.

First it was the moon landings, then it was President Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Now conspiracy theorists have a fresh subject about which they can cry “fake!”: the royal pregnancy.

Social media sites are awash with claims that the Duchess of Sussex’s bump is baby-free. The doubters are alleging that her stomach has been boosted with a “moonbump” prosthetic that wobbles.

On YouTube, a video that claims to provide “absolute proof” that the duchess’s pregnancy is a fake has had more than 208,000 views.

Its creator, whose channel has 31,000 subscribers, has made a series of videos all repeating the same allegation. Each has garnered more than 50,000 views and the first was released on the day that the duchess’s pregnancy was announced by Kensington Palace.

Such falsehoods are also widespread on Twitter and Instagram.

Although most of the false allegations are made by people who dislike the duchess, others portray her pregnancy as part of a wider conspiracy involving global elites.

The claims have also been shared on Prince Harry fan pages on Facebook.

The duchess’s exact due date has not been revealed, but she is expected to give birth either at the end of this month or at the start of May.

She has been subjected to vicious racist and sexist abuse online since the start of her relationship with Harry, but the hateful messages have increased since she announced her pregnancy.

After the couple launched their own official Instagram account last week, racist comments rapidly appeared on the profile.

Speaking at King’s College London for an International Women’s Day event last month, the duchess said she now avoided social media.

At least with this conspiracy theory she is in good company. The singer Beyoncé, known to her fans as “Queen Bey”, was also accused by trolls of faking her first pregnancy.

Beyoncé later gave birth to a daughter, Blue Ivy.

•In a break with royal tradition, the 37-year-old duchess has reportedly appointed her own medical team, headed by a female doctor, to oversee the birth of her first child.

According to The Mail on Sunday, royal household gynaecologists Alan Farthing and Guy Thorpe-Beeston, who delivered the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s children, will only be on hand in case of an emergency.

@rosamundurwin

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 353April 7, 2019 6:40 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 354April 7, 2019 6:47 PM

How odd that the Times is running this now when one only had to take a look at the DM comments section or DL for that matter months ago to see it's been ongoing speculation. SMH at devoting a Youtube channel to this.

by Anonymousreply 355April 7, 2019 7:09 PM

R351 - I would add the name Ava to the trendy list. Lady Ava Mountbatten-Windsor would not only be pretty and contemporary but would also honor an American actress named Ava Gardner.

Ava Elizabeth Diana would be the full name.

by Anonymousreply 356April 7, 2019 7:15 PM

Since Charlotte is Elizabeth Diana in that order, Smegma will go the other way with Diana Elizabeth. So if she opts traditional:

Mary Diana Elizabeth or Margaret Diana Elizabeh (nickname Meg/Meggie)

Trendy:

Ella Diana Caroline (like MEgs gives two fucks there is a Lady Gabriella? She will make Ella her brand.)

by Anonymousreply 357April 7, 2019 7:29 PM

R357 - Ella is one of the Clooney's twins.

by Anonymousreply 358April 7, 2019 7:30 PM

From CDAN:

March 31, 2019

So, what does the Palace do to the newspapers and tabloids in the countries they can't threaten when those tabloids talk about the royal affair? They did manage to shut down the naked photos years ago, but that was a little easier because it involved nudity. It will also be interesting to see if anyone says anything about her ex that she has seen multiple times over the past two years. The ex never lost his hair.

Prince William & Kate Middleton

by Anonymousreply 359April 7, 2019 7:31 PM

R356 - another possibility could be Ava Isabel/Isobel Diana (Isabel is the Spanish version of Elizabeth and Isobel is the Scottish form).

by Anonymousreply 360April 7, 2019 7:32 PM

R358, who are they taking about - Kat'es bf Rupert Something from like 20 yr ago?

by Anonymousreply 361April 7, 2019 7:49 PM

Perhaps Meghan will break with tradition and give the child only one middle name.

by Anonymousreply 362April 7, 2019 8:05 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 363April 7, 2019 8:06 PM

R359

Wait, Kate Middleton has nude pics?

by Anonymousreply 364April 7, 2019 8:09 PM

R364, they were printed years ago in a magazine (I forget which)... they were topless, taken via telephoto lens while Kate and William were on vacation. I don’t think they were nude but the rumor was there were a lot more racy photos that weren’t published.

by Anonymousreply 365April 7, 2019 8:23 PM

Big difference between nude photos taken through nefarious means and as invasion of privacy, and nude photos/ videos where one is posing provocatively in essence sexualizing oneself.

by Anonymousreply 366April 7, 2019 8:29 PM

Yes, “Ava” is a hip upscale LA mom type name.

by Anonymousreply 367April 7, 2019 8:30 PM

Ava is very popular now. Would Meghan give her baby a popular name? I see that cutting both ways. It would appeal to her target audience, but it wouldn't set her child apart from the masses.

by Anonymousreply 368April 7, 2019 8:36 PM

R1 - how about a pretentious French name for the child of a woman who thinks she's God's gift to the world?

Names like Antoinette, Dominique, Gabrielle, Marguerite/Margot, Monique, Céleste, Giselle, Desirée, Elodie, Clementine, Camille, Simone, Yvette, Amandine, Rochelle, Chantal, Adrienne, Amélie, Lucienne, Isabelle, Jacqueline, Geneviève, Colette, Alexandrine/Sandrine, Véronique, Henriette (for Harry), Sabine, Juliette, Rosalie, Violette, Léonie, Madeleine, Noémie, Solange, Vivienne, Sylvie etc...

Boy will be Olivier, Antoine, Alphonse, Claude, Gilles, Clément, Julien, Pierre, Guillaume (William), Gaspard, Henri (Henry/Harry), Gustave, Jean, Armand, Marcel, Edmond, Jérôme, Gaston, Benoît, Gabriel, Bertrand, Raoul, Sébastien, Christophe, Rémy, Pascal, Sylvain, Yannick, Tristan, Thierry, Maxime, Lucien, Jules etc...

by Anonymousreply 369April 7, 2019 8:43 PM

Interesting that press is again running the fake baby stories without any actual sympathy. It's almost like they want to draw their audience's attention to the fact people think she is not pregnant. In addition the DM previous article on the refusal of the royal doctors had a picture of her from the International Women's Day event. The same event where there is a video of her walking towards the crowd and her bump is swaying in the wind.

by Anonymousreply 370April 7, 2019 8:44 PM

If the baby does not come out of her, fathered by Dim, it is out of the line of succession though, yes?

I had anticipated she would get the kid glove treatment until after the baby but the tide has really turned and must be green lit by the BRF. She must really be a nightmare. Welp, they invited her in.

by Anonymousreply 371April 7, 2019 8:54 PM

R366 that is bullshit. Just because someone is “sexualizing” themselves they don’t deserve privacy? If MM made a sex tape for the privacy of herself and/or boyfriend she doesn’t deserve to have that privacy? We’re you even around for the fappening?

by Anonymousreply 372April 7, 2019 9:01 PM

R372 They deserve privacy but they aren't going to get it. If you don't want your sex tape to leak, don't make a sex tape.

by Anonymousreply 373April 7, 2019 9:33 PM

R361, I'm guessing they are referring to Willem Marx who is now a reporter for CNBC.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 374April 7, 2019 9:34 PM

R370

Streisand Effect!

by Anonymousreply 375April 7, 2019 9:38 PM

To paraphrase Clairee (oh, Google it) I'd rather walk on my lips than say anything nice or kind or supportive about Megantoinette. I think she's the worst type of climber. But I don't know why either the Times or even the wretched Maul would even report on this.

There's something called news judgment. Tons of shit happens each day in the world that is either so pointless or so idiotic it doesn't qualify as news. The fake pregnancy lunacy is part of it. A new low for journalists. It happened... but so what? News has consequence, or used to.

by Anonymousreply 376April 7, 2019 9:45 PM

r227 Where did you get the information she is using the NHS?

by Anonymousreply 377April 7, 2019 9:56 PM

Prince Charles' letter to Rwanda.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 378April 7, 2019 10:03 PM

I think Meghan is using as surrogate, just as Beyoncé, Kate Cruise, Amal Clooney and Nicole Kidman used surrogates. There is really nothing too wrong with keeping it private at this point in time. That is what the moon bumps are made for, so that a woman won't have the stigma of not carrying her own child for reasons of vanity and necessity (health).

She does not want pictures taken right after the birth, the bump keeps shifting around and the size keeps changing, she would not have been as large as she was in the beginning of her pregnancy if it was real. Surrogacy is very common. And, she is a lying lier, vain, self obsessed, delusional.

I will believe it if I see a photo of the baby with its head sticking out, but otherwise I don't think she is pregnant. Everything she has done is weird and suspicious. The whole living in Soho Cottage, not giving a expected birthdate, messing around with the hospital and doctors.

by Anonymousreply 379April 7, 2019 10:12 PM

The mistake the vain Salad Tosser made was to not use the same low-key steroid pills that many others use to give the puffy face/ankle mimicking effect for FULL pregnancy fakery. Had she done that, she might almost have gotten away with it...

Dumb bitch.

by Anonymousreply 380April 7, 2019 10:17 PM

Why is it so bad to use a surrogate? I know I would.

by Anonymousreply 381April 7, 2019 10:24 PM

R381— a baby born via surrogate might not be eligible to be in the line of succession

by Anonymousreply 382April 7, 2019 10:26 PM

So one thing... the child is still in line to succession to the throne. If it was found to be illegitimate, it could not be in the line. If it was discovered to be illegitimate, it would be a scandal as there would have been a conspiracy to conceal the fact. I don't know if the UK has done away with concept of illegitimacy (Canada has, for example) but I do know because I researched it for a project that to for a male child to be eligible to inherit, it has to be the blood product of a legal marriage between a man and a woman. So at present an adopted child, if 'first born' and male, still cannot succeed to a dukedom (or any other title.)

by Anonymousreply 383April 7, 2019 10:36 PM

Debrett's with regard to titles: Children adopted into a family do not acquire rights of succession to a title, and children adopted out of a family do not lose their rights. An Earl Marshal’s Warrant dated 30 April 2004 decreed that the adopted children of peers should be accorded the styles and courtesy titles as are proper to the younger children of peers, but without right of succession to the peerage.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 384April 7, 2019 10:38 PM

Perhaps the baby is not eligible, maybe that was an agreement if she informed Harry that she could not carry children. But that may be an undecided issue. Hopefully Kate (&) will make a baby sister for Charlotte.

I am so happy that the rules were changed to allow females in the line of succession. I would be happier if males were excluded, because I think Charlotte would make a seriously regal and responsible queen.

by Anonymousreply 385April 7, 2019 10:42 PM

Just to confirm how this will work, then - after the birth (or maybe even just prior to it) they will announce the hospital and most probably the names of the attending doctors. And at some point someone will smuggle the surrogate child into the hospital and the birth mother, doctors, all nursing staff and any other hospital staff who came into contact with H&M and the surrogate child will be paid off a large enough sum to ensure their silence and, in the case of the doctors, make them comfortable with breaking their Hippocratic Oath, thereby putting their remaining careers in jeopardy.

That all sounds rather expensive.

AND FUCKING CRAZY!!

You people are beyond deluded. There has to be a new word for your level of stupidity. But carry on - it’ll be entertaining to watch how you’ll explain all the above away once she gives birth.

by Anonymousreply 386April 7, 2019 10:46 PM

In the US, the surrogate is not considered the mother, and the mother is listed as the mother on the birth certificate. I believe that this is routinely handled discretely and legally at the same time. The surrogate would give birth, and after some time would hand the baby over to the parent. I don't think doctors or nurses are lying when they do this, it is seen as something private, somewhat as adoptions used to be.

Royal family business is something different, but I bet the Queen knows about it. The announcement from the palace didn't say Meghan was pregnant, but that the Duke and Duchess were expecting a child. No lies involved, just her stupid cradling to convince her subjects that she is carrying a live baby.

by Anonymousreply 387April 7, 2019 10:54 PM

Ouch! Brand Sussex

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 388April 7, 2019 11:01 PM

There was a crazy conspiracy theory (i.e not crazy at all and totally believable) that Kate did the same thing with a George surrogate and this nurse person who must have accidentally blabbed to someone was ‘MI5-ed’ under the guise of “committed suicide due to shame”.

I hate Salad Tosser like a mofo, but I can’t help thinking how gleeful the Middletons must be knowing their own insane fuckery is being unquestioned.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 389April 7, 2019 11:17 PM

R387, R386 here - you’ve proved my point:

“Royal family business is something different, but I bet the Queen knows about it”.

Barking mad.

by Anonymousreply 390April 7, 2019 11:18 PM

R389 If you read the page for which you provided the link (there are lots of big words so you possibly didn’t) you’ll get the story on what happened. No “crazy conspiracy theory”, just the pretty bloody sad story of a woman who committed suicide.

You find the death of “this nurse person” entertaining, do you?

by Anonymousreply 391April 7, 2019 11:25 PM

Princess Bea Athina Onasis...thats rich,iam laughing

I think those hollaring Megs will have a surrogate baby.Cannot except that Prince Harry did not slide his big uncut penis into their bloated snatches to create a new royal.They will never except that child and spend years making up random stories.From the council houses they obviously occupy.

by Anonymousreply 392April 7, 2019 11:25 PM

I think I read on one of these threads that in the UK, the surrogate is legally considered the mother.

Can someone confirm this?

by Anonymousreply 393April 7, 2019 11:26 PM

A surrogate can use the other woman's (bio-mom) egg. She's then just a uterus for rent and has no biological relationship to the child.

by Anonymousreply 394April 7, 2019 11:28 PM

The link at R389 says nothing about a surrogate.

The prank call happened when Kate was admitted to the hospital early on in her pregnancy with severe morning sickness.

by Anonymousreply 395April 7, 2019 11:30 PM

Perhaps this is where Amal Clooney comes into play, helping MEghan navigate all the surrogacy laws and such, Amal having personal and professional experience in this area. Where were the camera shy Clooney twins born? England?

by Anonymousreply 396April 7, 2019 11:31 PM

Bugnuts Bunnyboiler @ r392. I mean this kindly, as English is very obviously not your first language: it’s “holler” not “hollar”. It’s “accept” not “except”. The run on sentence at “random stories.From” should not have been broken in two. There should be spaces between sentences. Otherwise carry on, your fantasy is entertaining in a dumb-as-a-box-of-hair kind of way.

by Anonymousreply 397April 7, 2019 11:49 PM

Yes R3, that is the only reason people think Prince Harry is bi. Nothing else. Thank you for pointing out how silly. You disingenuous idiot.

by Anonymousreply 398April 7, 2019 11:54 PM

[quote] The announcement from the palace didn't say Meghan was pregnant, but that the Duke and Duchess were expecting a child.

That is perhaps the single stupidest observation I have ever read on this site. And it's fangurl central for fucking porn stars. Blocked.

by Anonymousreply 399April 7, 2019 11:55 PM

People scoff, but Smeggy will be the downfall of this institution. It has thrived on myth, but the reality appear to be NOBODY is doing shit. Meghan (with Harry co-signing) is engaging in a Cambridge smear campaign targeting Kate and William's marriiage and Kate's family. Harry has to be in on it but he is still included. The Ostritch sticking its head in the sand. It doesn't matter what ostensible punitive measures the BRF takes against the Sussexes if the measure are not perceived to be punitive.

by Anonymousreply 400April 7, 2019 11:57 PM

That photo R388 really shows Meghan to be losing her hair, that center part has been widening and now very noticeable. After pregnancy, women also lose more hair so she's looking at next 7-8 months of hair loss until her hair starts growing again.

by Anonymousreply 401April 8, 2019 12:04 AM

R362 - William and Kate already did that. Their three children only have three names each.

by Anonymousreply 402April 8, 2019 12:18 AM

^By the way, that was meant to be ironic.

That said, they did cut it down from the usual four to three.

But given Meghan's poorly hidden taste for status, she'll want the new royal to seem just as royal as the Cambridge kids, so she'll probably follow suit and give the kid three names.

by Anonymousreply 403April 8, 2019 12:21 AM

R401 Actually, pregnant women don’t lose much hair during pregnancy. It goes into a rest cycle of sorts, which accounts for the lush hair most pregnant women get. After birth, at around three months postpartum, the hair that didn’t fall out during pregnancy starts shedding at all once. It gets pretty disturbing to see big tangles of hair falling like mad. This phenomenon stops around months 6-9 postpartum. You’ll often see women with that annoying baby fringe on their forehead when the baby is around one year. Katie Holmes had it bad with Suri.

by Anonymousreply 404April 8, 2019 12:22 AM

I believe Meghan suffers from permanent hair loss due to years of straightening and blow-outs. A woman's hair typically gets thicker and healthier as their pregnancy progresses.

R402 Maybe she will cut it down to two names. Anything to be different.

by Anonymousreply 405April 8, 2019 12:23 AM

R385 - Females were already in the line of succession - but they were always behind any males siblings even if those male siblings were younger. Charlotte would still have been in the line of succession if the laws hadn't been changed, but her younger brother Louis would be ahead of her, just as Princess Anne's younger brothers, Edward and Andrew, preceded her in the line of succession. But if Charles, Andrew, and Edward had succumbed to diphtheria or something, Anne would still have been next, ahead of her Uncle Andrew.

by Anonymousreply 406April 8, 2019 12:26 AM

R399, sorry, but I only meant that the words released by the palace were carefully crafted.

by Anonymousreply 407April 8, 2019 12:33 AM

R372 - She didn't do it for herself in privacy or a boyfriend - she did it for money. That's the real issue. If she'd done it for a private thrill, knowledge of it wouldn't have been floating out there for so long. The next King's daughter in law making salacious films for money just has consequences, whether people like it or not. Kate was sunbathing topless in what she thought was a privte home far off main roads. The photographer climbed a huge tree with telephoto lens to invade her AND her husband's privacy. There is a difference.

When Marilyn Monroe began to get famous that calendar shot of her so beloved of so many men for so long, it came back to confront her, and this was in the 1950s. (And even a gay man can see that it was a beautiful photograph.) Marilyn did the sensible thing: she said she'd been poor and did it for survival money at the time, and when asked if she'd had anything on when it was taken [sic], she replied, "The radio."

by Anonymousreply 408April 8, 2019 12:33 AM

In the UK the surrogate is legally the mother and has to relinquish her parental rights. The parents would hten have to effectively adopt the child. In this situation you are dependent on the "mother" relinquishing their parental rights. This is why Viscount Weymouth and his wife went to the US for their second child. If MM has a surrogate and it was public knowledge the baby woudn't be eligible for succession.

I see the person who seems to exist purely to poor cold water on speculation is back again. People always like to speculate about gossip, some more than others. Deal with it.

In the conspiracy theorist's favour Meghan's bump has been up and down in size like a ballon. She's able to bend down an jump up unaided in heels whilst several months pregnant. The bump has looked square at times, there is a disappearing outie belly button (which appeared to be an innie before she was pregnant). Her bump has disappeared more than once when she sat down. There is also video of it swaying when she walks and another video of it apparently inflating. She doesn't appear to have put weight on anywhere other than her bump. Her cankles remain stubbornly chicken like.

There have been persistent rumours that royal doctors have not examined MM. Now we have a story about her refusal to have royal doctors at the birth. The announcement of her pregnancy is quite unlike all the other royal announcements. Finally we've had no offical annoucement of birth month or medical team, which we usually get by now. Meghan keeps telling people different things, in Australia she told someone she was 16 weeks and was then "almost there" in January. The baby is apparently due in April but could be born in May because she had a friend that happened to...

Is pretending to be pregnant when you have a surrogate crazy? Yeah but MM hasn't inspired me with confidence that she is sane. Her mind really does seem to work differently to the rest of us. Most of us if we married into that family would be keeping it quite and keeping in line, being circumspect and behaving with some decorum. Not MM, she's got her PR on blast 24/7 responding to any and every half baked story that is not 100% favourable. She's apparently spending money like water and dressing in illfitting clothing, merching up a storm and drawing as much attention to herself as possible. Telling fibs and not expecting to be called on it. This woman is capable of anything, she has the worst of Diana's traits.

It is perfectly possible that she has a surrogate somewhere or that she had the idea to fake pregnancy for attention without actually thinking things through. She could also be pregnant. Given how much of a famewhore this woman is, it's strange we haven't seen her in a yoga outfit or bikini showing off her pregnant belly. Instead the belly is always entirely, if sometimes inapropriately covered.

by Anonymousreply 409April 8, 2019 12:34 AM

R396 , that’s an interesting angle: surrogacy, law, and Amal. I think you’re definitely on to something.

by Anonymousreply 410April 8, 2019 12:40 AM

R394 - Unfortunately, in the UK, the woman that gives birth to the child is the only one with parental rights, even if there is no biological link. So in order for Harry and Meghan to claim parental rights, a surrogate must legally waive her parental rights, which means something legal has to occur and be recorded with a court. And then DNA has to prove that the child is biologically Harry's.

by Anonymousreply 411April 8, 2019 12:42 AM

R408 where the hell did you read she did it for money? Yet again a rumor upthread becomes fact downthread. Lots of fantasy scenarios going on here,

by Anonymousreply 412April 8, 2019 12:42 AM

Delighted to report that no matter what the little mesalliance is called, it will not be a prince or princess and never will be. There will be no upgrade come Charles accession to the throne. (And even if it were possible, why would they? Charles' won't reign forever, so why create a potentially even worse version of Scandal Andy, the Duchess of Clingon, Beetroot and Huge?)

"George V declared that: "the grandchildren of the sons of any such Sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of Dukes of these Our Realms."

When born, the rank of the child is determined. The child will be a grandchild of Charles. Charles is son of the sovereign. Therefore Baby Sussex is Earl of Dumbarton if he's a boy or otherwise Lady Flatunia Cleopatra Venus Dinahnah Medusa Becky Mountbatten-Windsor.

It would take Charles III to decree otherwise and by the time he teeters to the throne there ought to be no doubt anywhere about the Duchess of Success' long term viability. Besides, all Dim wants is to be normal...

Hurrah... she's foiled!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 413April 8, 2019 12:45 AM

All you moon bump freaks have yet to answer with any credible evidence one simple question: Why would she do this? You're long on what, incredibly so, but you never say why. Even Dim could figure out faking it is a bad idea.

by Anonymousreply 414April 8, 2019 12:47 AM

[R397]

Only for those in England,you demented piece of trash.Why don't you know the difference from English and Americanized spelling?Were you raised in a barn you fat ,stinking Heifer....?

by Anonymousreply 415April 8, 2019 12:54 AM

R415 = Samantha Markle

by Anonymousreply 416April 8, 2019 12:58 AM

[quote] Why would she do this?

R414, apparently you are expecting someone who does not behave in a normal way to have a reasonable reason for her behavior.

1) Why does she not wear clothes by British designers?

2) Why does she push in front her her husband, ignoring protocol?

3) Why do so many of her clothes not fit?

4) Why would she throw a fit after being offered a choice of tiaras by her future husband's grandmother?

5) Why did she start her contact with her future sister-in-law with a nasty supposed blind item?

Sparkle has done and continues to do all sorts of "Why does she do this???" things she she appeared on the RF scene?

Given her track record, a pretend pregnancy is not that hard to imagine at all.

by Anonymousreply 417April 8, 2019 12:59 AM

R414 Many women in the public eye, such as Sarah Jessica Parker, Nicole Kidman do it for a variety reasons. Infertility, age, inconvenience. I can imagine MM prancing around a week after the "birth," svelte and full of advice for other postpartum mums, giving advice on dropping the weight and posing for magazine covers about the wonders of childbirth and benefits of yoga and organic Soho food. I cannot imagine her sacrificing any of her fading youth and beauty for a child if she can hire someone else to do the dirty work of carrying the babe for 9 months.

by Anonymousreply 418April 8, 2019 1:03 AM

There are two twitter accounts that tumblr suspects are MM. They both seem to be getting increasingly unhinged.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 419April 8, 2019 1:05 AM

But at the same time use her "word salad"

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 420April 8, 2019 1:06 AM

So far, the Queen has five great-granddaughters and only two great-grandsons. I have a weird feeling the Sussex baby is going to be yet another girl, though I have no idea why.

by Anonymousreply 421April 8, 2019 1:10 AM

Is anyone else looking forward to the frautoshopped images with Diana's ghost smiling beatifically over Bean's shoulder, holding a loving hand on SohoBébé's head? That's really all I care about at this point.

by Anonymousreply 422April 8, 2019 1:13 AM

R415 LOL

by Anonymousreply 423April 8, 2019 1:13 AM

R412 - No one had to read it. Meghan Markle would have done anything for anyone who promised her advancement. She's an amoral narcissist. If it had been a private tape, it wouldn't be out there. That kind of path to advancement is common as dirt in the business she was trying to succeed in.

by Anonymousreply 424April 8, 2019 1:19 AM

R424 ok so you just made it up, right? You do know, by the way, that nothing is out there. If there is, please post it. Oh wait, you can’t!

Oh, what the hell am I doing? Trying to speak sensibly will get me nowhere in this thread.

by Anonymousreply 425April 8, 2019 1:23 AM

R392. Hello Crazy! As usual nothing that you say makes anything approaching sense. You’re accusing other people of racism yet all that you say is racist and sexist and classist.

And you still can’t spell or construct a logical sentence in even the most basic English.

You’re very entertaining, Crazy. You’re also nuts!

Take your meds.

by Anonymousreply 426April 8, 2019 1:26 AM

R398 Yiu have no straight meals friends, do you? Fuck, you Americans are so parochial.

by Anonymousreply 427April 8, 2019 1:30 AM

[quote]Sparkle has done and continues to do all sorts of "Why does she do this???" things she she appeared on the RF scene?

Of course it is. This isn't The Young and the Restless. Don't be an idiot. There's a line between gossip and fantasy. Learn it, because people like you are to interesting discussion what constipation is to bowel function.

by Anonymousreply 428April 8, 2019 1:32 AM

Sorry, ^ that stupid I quoted at R428 made me so bonkers I forgot the line that made me snap:

Given her track record, a pretend pregnancy is not that hard to imagine at all.

by Anonymousreply 429April 8, 2019 1:33 AM

R425 - You idiot. This is a gossip site. CDAN hasn't posted it and neither has BILD, because they either can't or won't. I quite agree that it very well might not exist. Then again, it might. But to suppose that if one does exist, it was just a little thrill video between Meghan and some boyfriend that some stranger got his or her hands on is absurd. Meghan's ferocious ambitions are well known and sex as a way up for young would-be stars is the norm, not the exception. She's never been too picky about what she said once as opposed to what she says now. "I didn't know much of anything about the royal family when I met Harry!"

by Anonymousreply 430April 8, 2019 1:39 AM

Can someone tell me what a straight meal is?

by Anonymousreply 431April 8, 2019 1:41 AM

R415 The challenge for you, Crazy, is not whether you use “Americanized” (sic) English or any other kind. It’s all about your - how can I say this politely - idiosyncratic approach to spelling and grammar, in addition to your completely unhinged thought processes which spill into the written word:

“An” for “and”. Not knowing when to hit the space bar. Accusing others of racism and classicism while spewing racist and classist words in your lunatic posts. It’s almost too easy to make fun of you. But not completely too easy - you are a fucking unhinged joke and everybody who reads your word vomit is laughing at you.

But you must be used to that, right, Crazy?

by Anonymousreply 432April 8, 2019 1:43 AM

Ok r430, you’re debating about the origins of a tape you that you admit you don’t know whether it exists, and which no one has seen or says they possess. And I’m the idiot...

Gossip is fun; delusions, not so much.

by Anonymousreply 433April 8, 2019 1:44 AM

R431 It's straight meals, plural! No idea what it means.

by Anonymousreply 434April 8, 2019 1:45 AM

Straight meals are very unhealthy.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 435April 8, 2019 1:53 AM

Ah, we must kindly adjust.

by Anonymousreply 436April 8, 2019 2:02 AM

R431, R434 and R435 - R427 here.

I’m a victim of not checking spellcheck before posting.

What I was attempting to say was “you have no straight male friends, do you?”.

This was to the poster who is so limited that he assumes that any male with biceps so isn’t ugly must be gay. In addition to his belief that any male with gay male friends just HAS to be gay. Because that is his sad and parochial experience.

Therefore Prince Harry is gay, as he has a not unattractive, reasonably fit mate. Because that’s what fits with the poster’s pretty pathetic, suburban, American view,

by Anonymousreply 437April 8, 2019 2:03 AM

R437 I think (?) I partly understand your point about gay stereotypes, but pretty sure you didn't need to throw in an American stereotype to make it.

by Anonymousreply 438April 8, 2019 2:28 AM

R425, I agree, but I can't understand why you didn't figure out this insanity during one of the 34 previous threads.

by Anonymousreply 439April 8, 2019 2:43 AM

Touché, r439...

by Anonymousreply 440April 8, 2019 2:44 AM

The WriteLife PR twitter thread does seem overly adoring of MM. is it her?

by Anonymousreply 441April 8, 2019 2:48 AM

The surrogate is implanted with a fertilized egg. Meghan supposedly told partners that she could not have children but that she had frozen her eggs. There was a time right after their marriage where they went to visit George & Amal Clooney at their home in Lake Como, Italy, where there is supposedly an excellent fertility clinic. I think they consulted with George & Amal, and perhaps the surrogate is one that they are familiar with and possibly Italian.

Why would she do it? I doubt if she could conceive naturally, and she has said she cannot carry a baby (rumor, I suppose). Do you think Harry would marry her if she said "I can't have kids?" NO. So this was the solution, not an unusual one for people in her posse. If this happened, I believe that Harry explained it to the queen and insisted on marrying Meghan. What could they say? We won't let him marry an infertile woman? Remind yourselves what the Queen's face looked like at the wedding if you don't believe something is fishy.

It isn't likely that the British public would embrace the idea of a surrogate for a royal baby, so I believe this is why they decided to be discrete about it.

Surrogacy and fertility is turning into big business.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 442April 8, 2019 2:52 AM

R438 Because so much of the stupidity on these threads comes from Americans who have just taken an interest in the British royal family courtesy of “Duchess Meghan”, pontificating on an ancient and complex institution and on its main players when they know nothing about it while stating opinion as fact. Ditto for the English aristocracy - not understanding how they operate yet espousing opinions based on them as celebrities, through the very narrow lens of their own life experience.

by Anonymousreply 443April 8, 2019 3:01 AM

Marry me, R433, and then lets run away from here forever.

by Anonymousreply 444April 8, 2019 3:02 AM

R433, The Americans are discussing Meghan Markle, and we more than understand how she operates.

by Anonymousreply 445April 8, 2019 3:07 AM

What will the baby look like? Meghan or Harry or Meghan's first husband?

by Anonymousreply 446April 8, 2019 3:24 AM

R443 Well then, it's completely understandable that you throw them all under the bus. Bravo!

by Anonymousreply 447April 8, 2019 3:25 AM

R443 here, R447 - I absolutely agree!

by Anonymousreply 448April 8, 2019 3:26 AM

Stereotypes are fun!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 449April 8, 2019 3:36 AM

And just for you R443

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 450April 8, 2019 3:41 AM

It does sound like Bean. The posting sched is a bit manic.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 451April 8, 2019 3:42 AM

R451 The whole account is odd. Reads like the work of someone who fancies herself something of a sophisticate and intellectual, a sociologist practically.

by Anonymousreply 452April 8, 2019 4:02 AM

[quote] The surrogate is implanted with a fertilized egg. Meghan supposedly told partners that she could not have children

Stop lying

by Anonymousreply 453April 8, 2019 4:25 AM

Ha R450 - R443 here. Funny. Would probably be funnier (the British are know for their self-deprecating humour) if I were British.

But I’m not.

by Anonymousreply 454April 8, 2019 4:28 AM

The York's wanted to name one of their girls Annabel but HM vetoed it. Annabel's was a popular Mayfair nightclub at the time.

And maybe it's worth mentioning again that Bea has known her rake since childhood; this isn't some quick gigolo romance. Their families have been close for years.

by Anonymousreply 455April 8, 2019 4:56 AM

^ The Yorks, not The York's. Sorry.

by Anonymousreply 456April 8, 2019 4:59 AM

[quote] You’ll often see women with that annoying baby fringe on their forehead when the baby is around one year. Katie Holmes had it bad with Suri.

OMG!!!! that's so hilariously fucking stupid. Katie cut her hair a few days before her wedding. We all know it. And it was written about extensively on Datalounge. About 4 days before the wedding, no fringe. Two days before , there's fringe. Scissors did that

Here she is arriving for her wedding

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 457April 8, 2019 5:09 AM

Here she is 2 days later at her wedding

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 458April 8, 2019 5:09 AM

Linking this because it rattles cages on these threads.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 459April 8, 2019 5:27 AM

Glad that others have addressed this but it’s worth repeating...

In the UK, the person who gives birth is the legal mother. The baby needs to be registered within 6 weeks & there will be a birth cerificate listing AT LEAST the mother’s name in it. The father can only be listed too if he’s physically present. (He can go on later if he’s indisposed for some reason).

If a surrogate has a baby, a certificate is issued with the surrogate mother down as mother and the bio-father (if we’re talking about heterosexual/gay male parents) as father. Being on the certificate gives the father parental rights, so he can legally take the baby to care for with his partner (with the surrogate mother’s agreement).

The non-surrogate mother then has to apply through the courts to legally adopt the baby and terminate the parental rights of the surrogate. This takes CONSIDERABLY longer than 6 weeks, so there will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be a first birth certificate with the name of whoever physically gave birth to the baby.

Birth certificates (even for royals) are a matter of public record - and anyone can apply for a copy to see what it says. So this is not something that the royals could keep hidden without wholescale criminal fraud - necessitating a criminal conspiracy involving not just the parents but a team of professional doctors too, and the registrar.

So.....for those insisting that Markle’s using a surrogate, just wait for the birth certificate. When it emerges with Markle’s name on it (within 6 weeks) then that PROVES your ridiculous fantasises are without foundation.

If even this won’t be enough for you, then take your tins hats and fuck off. Your IQs are far to low for you to presume to keep posting on DL. You are not welcome so piss off.

by Anonymousreply 460April 8, 2019 6:41 AM

R385 You’ve decided that a three year old child who you e never met will (one day, presumably) make a good Head of State of the United Kingdom?

Yep, no shortage of stupid on these threads.

by Anonymousreply 461April 8, 2019 8:23 AM

I think the royals are in on M using a surrogate . And be sure when the time comes for that surrogate to give birth you will never see the name of her on that certificate . It will be M s name . Why you think the baby didn’t get a HRH ? She is never examined by the royal OBgyns nor is she using them for the birth . I found that very odd. No lindo wing either . And she is the most status obsessed woman on the face of this earth . No coming down from the stairs at Lindo Wing . All that glam and glitter and paps she so craves . No a home birth or a hospital near her abode. She can manipulate whoever doctor is there for the surrogate giving birth . She can’t manipulate the doctors at Lindo Wing or the staff .

by Anonymousreply 462April 8, 2019 8:53 AM

I agree, R462. The BRF knows Eggo isn't preggo.

by Anonymousreply 463April 8, 2019 8:55 AM

r462 - I are insane. Do you realize how many people have to be "in on it" for your scenario to be true? Tell me, what are your thoughts re Diana's death?

by Anonymousreply 464April 8, 2019 8:58 AM

R462 and R463 You’re morons., the pair of you.

She’s pregnant. Get the fuck over it, you infantile pair of turds.

by Anonymousreply 465April 8, 2019 9:02 AM

“Why do you think the baby didn’t get an HRH.l

Jesus. Because the baby is too far down the line of succession to get one automatically. HM would have to make a special case...and why should she?

Educate yourself, idiot.

by Anonymousreply 466April 8, 2019 9:05 AM

Fuck you, R465. You're a complete fucking asshole. So people disagree with you and have different opinions. Why is it any skin off your fucking nose? I hate cunts like you.

by Anonymousreply 467April 8, 2019 9:07 AM

Go back to whatever sites worship the ugly, fake whore.

by Anonymousreply 468April 8, 2019 9:08 AM

R460 It's too late you can't reason with them. They're feeding off of each other all over the internet and they aren't going to listen to any kind of reason. Honestly at this point they are worse than the meghan stans.

by Anonymousreply 469April 8, 2019 9:30 AM

All you’re doing, moron, is continuing to demonstrate how stupid you are.

I don’t worship Markle...I am the author of some of the most scathing posts on here. But I like FACTS...not childish fantasies based on no evidence whatsoever.

Go back to Royal Gossip. DL is usually an escape from pathetic conspiracy theorists - but you are so obsessed you have to comment absolutely everywhere.

Meghan Markle is pregnant. There is no conspiracy involving professional doctors, hospital staff, government officials and the royal family, you utter, utter cunt.

R469 I know. Would be nice if they pissed off, though.

by Anonymousreply 470April 8, 2019 9:33 AM

Jesus. This thread has become so tedious and stupid it hurts. I'm flummoxed by the amount of tl;dr posts devoted to the topic of surrogacy one way or another be it to support the far flung, harebrained conspiracy or to debunk as though the conspiracy-minded are amenable to changing opinions (QAnon, anyone?) . And it's been done to death since the Tendrils threads, practically from the moment she wore the damn maternity coat to the wedding.

by Anonymousreply 471April 8, 2019 9:39 AM

Whenever you dare to say M uses a surrogate they go in a frenzy and in attack mode . It isn’t possible you think .? She is a very vain woman and she is already short and stocky . Her chicken legs are never swollen and yet she 8 months and a half . When she was so-called 6 months she looked as If she was gonna give birth every minute . She isn’t pregnant herself .

by Anonymousreply 472April 8, 2019 9:45 AM

I think it was her former best friend, and school class mate Ninaki Priddy (41) who told of the frozen eggs situation.

by Anonymousreply 473April 8, 2019 10:02 AM

Why is her former school class mate 41 and she is 37?

by Anonymousreply 474April 8, 2019 10:11 AM

Exactly R474, she's been 37 for years. She was 36 in an article printed pre-Harry, I'll see if I can find it online. This has been a talking point for so long, her questionable age. Ninaki Priddy goes back years with her, it was her whom she was pictured with outside Buck Palace when they were little girls. She's been ghosted, now, of course.

by Anonymousreply 475April 8, 2019 10:15 AM

She might have been 34 in the article, actually, it was from 2013, but I WILL try and find it, for without proof I guess it will be thought that I'm talking rubbish.

by Anonymousreply 476April 8, 2019 10:18 AM

I don't understand the need to indulge in surrogate fantasies. You do realize this "Minx on the Make" can disprove your postings if she wants to and then extend the pity party for her entire Maternity leave and garner public sympathy. Image that Markle emerges from the Lido Wing disheveled, presents her baby to the crowd, looks at the camera plaintively and says -

"I'm here to let you see my baby, whose birth from body was filmed by my husband, and because so many require proof of my pregnancy we will post it to Instagram. "

I think that H & M's coyness about the birth is likely due to wanting to shield the baby's the appearance. Everyone will be ridiculing that baby. Much better to let it grow a bit and to distribute professional photographs at a later date.

by Anonymousreply 477April 8, 2019 10:27 AM

I wish she did film the entire birth . Then we wouldn’t have to speculate aren’t we ? Oh when she can wait 6 weeks to show the baby than I know its from a surrogate . She lives to be in the spotlight and than she is suddenly shy and coy ? Really ?

by Anonymousreply 478April 8, 2019 10:35 AM

And also wearing stiletto’s up to the last public event !

by Anonymousreply 479April 8, 2019 10:39 AM

r441 A lot of people think the Strong Write account is her.

by Anonymousreply 480April 8, 2019 10:41 AM

I think the DM knows it too . That’s one of the bomshells they’re sitting on regarding H and M .

by Anonymousreply 481April 8, 2019 10:46 AM

R451, both of these twitter handles seem completely delusional. And if indeeed they are MM then she is nuts. She really thinks she and Dimwit are the chosen ones..

by Anonymousreply 482April 8, 2019 10:47 AM

This is a nice little site and a labour of love for someone

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 483April 8, 2019 11:28 AM

What are the twitter accounts? Can't find write life pr.

by Anonymousreply 484April 8, 2019 11:28 AM

Here it is

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 485April 8, 2019 11:33 AM

False narratives? That's a good one. She's the Quee...wait. She's the Duchess of false narratives, for fuck's sake.

by Anonymousreply 486April 8, 2019 11:37 AM

People, the BRF either doesnt give a fuck or are in over their heads concerning MM and all her shenanigans. She just might finish what Diana started. I think Harry has an axe to grind with his family and wants to sabotage (sp?l it . Maybe he pushing it and wants a big payday so he and his grifter can live an self congratulating insincere Hollyweird style life. The senior BRF are too old, unwilling and sick to handle this lil madam..Face it, Dim and Grift spell the end. All by design.

by Anonymousreply 487April 8, 2019 11:45 AM

Apologies for grammatical and spelling errors. Im half asleep still.

by Anonymousreply 488April 8, 2019 12:03 PM

Fuck’s sake.

Of course it’s possible she’s using a surrogate. People do.

It’s IMPOSSIBLE for her to lie about it. It would require a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY of many people.

What part of that do you retards fail to understand?

by Anonymousreply 489April 8, 2019 12:03 PM

"It would require a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY of many people."

And we all know THAT'S never happened before!

by Anonymousreply 490April 8, 2019 12:12 PM

[quote]I think the DM knows it too . That’s one of the bomshells they’re sitting on regarding H and M .

Don't kid yourself, tinhat. If the Mail had your imaginary bombshells they wouldn't be sitting on them.

by Anonymousreply 491April 8, 2019 12:16 PM

This is pretty simple. One, she's a 38 year old approaching the end of pregnancy and she's huge. And keenly aware there's a lot of people don't like her. And full of new age, organic yoga bullshit. She is tired, she is full of herself and she's fat. She's spending the last few weeks on the nest, waiting. It's pretty typical, even for a blowhard like her.

by Anonymousreply 492April 8, 2019 12:18 PM

She must be exhausted! She's been schlepping that moonbump around for what...11 months?

by Anonymousreply 493April 8, 2019 12:24 PM

Maybe we are tinhatters but maybe we aren’t . From the moment she married H its all gone downhill . I’m not a Brit and If the monarchy should end so be it . But H and M would be on the short stick If the monarchy ends .They don’t have too much assets to be on their own . And I don’t think Charles will give them money as long as he lives when he is no longer the future king . Than it will be everyone for themselves . Its on H and M best interest to maintain that royal institution .

by Anonymousreply 494April 8, 2019 12:51 PM

And If they are no longer royal they can pay taxes like the commoners .

by Anonymousreply 495April 8, 2019 12:55 PM

I agree with R487 (grammar errors and all). :) I think Harry and MM have an agenda and its to dismantle the current monarchy as is so they can become the new generation of monarchy. They being the Prince and Princess of the People. Rebranding it to suit their selfish, narcissistic philosphy. Look at who is popular in the world today. Social Media/Media spin and manufactured perception given to the masses is what matters. If you paint yourself OTT, SJW, and kiss media ass and paint yourself in a particular way, the masses will love you. That is what is going on. H &M esp M, knows this. Unfortunately, they will thrive and get more popular. Just wait and see.

by Anonymousreply 496April 8, 2019 1:32 PM

[quote] This thread has become so tedious and stupid it hurts. I'm flummoxed by the amount of tl;dr posts devoted to the topic of surrogacy one way or another be it to support the far flung, harebrained conspiracy or to debunk as though the conspiracy-minded are amenable to changing opinions (QAnon, anyone?)

And it's clearly the same five people making the same tedious points. How empty does your life have to be to type out all that garbage again and again?

by Anonymousreply 497April 8, 2019 1:41 PM

Well..let's liven things up a bit. What will be the next piece of outrageous drama that will rock the BRF?

by Anonymousreply 498April 8, 2019 1:44 PM

Then get lost, R497. Who the fuck is holding a gun to your lovely, empty head?

I don't get why people keep complaining about these posts. If you're disappointed in them, or bored with them, then beat it. But don't keep having little hissy fits and expect anything to change.

by Anonymousreply 499April 8, 2019 1:44 PM

R433 - Don't go simples on us. Of course we're discussing a tape that no one has seen but whose existence has been floating out there for two years. BILD published the story - go talk to them and the sex tape broker who says he got the call from the owner. And since Meghan Markle's past history doesn't exactly suggest a particularly choosy approach to clawing her way up the ladder, the only idiot is one heatedly insisting she couldn't possibly EVAH have done such a thing.

It's only idiocy when it's something you don't like. When it's something else, it's delicious gossip.

by Anonymousreply 500April 8, 2019 1:49 PM

R491 - Oh, yes, they would. They know perfectly well that some lines are more dangerous to cross in the long-term than others. IF they have such a bombshell, they sat down with their fleets of libel, slander, and privacy legal specialists and were either told they couldn't get away with it OR they know that doing it in the first year of marriage with a baby on the way was something that would backfire so badly it wouldn't be worth the clicks they'd get for a week or so.

Britain does NOT have a free press.

It's called choosing your battles carefully. If the day comes when the British press thinks the time is ripe to ruin the next King's daughter-in-law's public image for good, they'll do it. If not they won't. And if you think they haven't before now withheld particularly ruinous information about the royals, think again.

That is assuming they have it at all. Which I'm still on the fence about.

by Anonymousreply 501April 8, 2019 1:55 PM

Where's part 36? And by the way, thank you so, so much to the wonderful DLer who keeps adding fresh installments.

by Anonymousreply 502April 8, 2019 2:03 PM

The Queen isn't having it?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 503April 8, 2019 2:21 PM

I don't believe those two raptors eat a mostly plant-based diet.

by Anonymousreply 504April 8, 2019 2:27 PM

Some light relief for the thread.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 505April 8, 2019 2:27 PM

R460 = Weird overweight frau Salad Tosser stan who waits outside churches for glimpses of the Royal Family

by Anonymousreply 506April 8, 2019 2:29 PM

Veganism is “pushing the boundaries?”

by Anonymousreply 507April 8, 2019 2:32 PM

R503 Maybe Great-Gran will have the baby over to Windsor Castle for a bit of tea and baby food made from the annual Christmas hunt at Sandringham. Unless Meghan delivers bananas instead, R505

by Anonymousreply 508April 8, 2019 2:35 PM

You spin me right round, baby, right round......

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 509April 8, 2019 2:38 PM

R506i think the overweight fraus on this thread are the one prattling on about moon pillows and the MM plot to overthrow the monarchy. Which one are you?

Ever since DL was overrun by the fraus from other message boards, logic, wit and common sense have flown out the window.

by Anonymousreply 510April 8, 2019 2:39 PM

R498

-Andrew taken in for questioning for his part in the Jeffrey Epstein pedo island scandal -The Middletons Party Pieces company proved to be a front for Uncle Gary’s illicit activity -Carol and Mike Mid living apart and having new partners -Irrefutable proof Harry isn’t Charles kid -Harry being gay -Mike Tindall cheating on Zara -Princess Kate ‘seeing’ one of her old boyfriends -Salad Tossing and coke snorting tapes at their finest

Etc

by Anonymousreply 511April 8, 2019 2:39 PM

^r506...

by Anonymousreply 512April 8, 2019 2:40 PM

Thanks, r512! We need some fresh scandals to liven up the conversation. These sound like fun—and potentially true. Andrew especially... the guy is so guilty it’s unbelievable. Shows how the long reach of the monarchy protects its own, even if they’re the lowest form of humanity (pedophile).

by Anonymousreply 513April 8, 2019 2:42 PM

R513 they are indeed all true. Salad Tosser is the RF’s wet dream, taking attention away from everything else (most importantly Andy’s activities....he also used to pimp out Bea/Eug to his Saudi friends)

The newspapers are sitting on all these stories. I hope they come out soon too because I’m SO BORED of MEEEEEGAIN!

by Anonymousreply 514April 8, 2019 2:47 PM

It looks like there's no longer hope for this thread.

by Anonymousreply 515April 8, 2019 2:47 PM

First time mothers are often a week or more overdue. I doubt we're lucky enough that Meghan will have the baby early and relieve us of our misery, so we're probably in for it at least until early May.

by Anonymousreply 516April 8, 2019 2:52 PM

How do we know that Kate’s parents are separated? Any pics of their significant others?

Btw I’ve been meaning to ask this—people have mentioned that the anti-MM fraus flocked here from a defunct message board. What message board was it? There definitely has been a change in tone in these threads. DL always had some tinfoil hat types, but they were pretty much ridiculed. They seem to rule the roost here.

by Anonymousreply 517April 8, 2019 3:00 PM

I think its more ex-tumblr types, a number of tumblr blogs shut down or where shut down and I remember that charlatan duchess facebook page used to post about threads here frequently. Royal Dish which shut its PH/MM section wasn't particularly known for tolerating conspiracy theories.

by Anonymousreply 518April 8, 2019 3:18 PM

R518 I agree. Royal Dish was anti-Meghan, but nothing like the Tumblr types who've flocked here recently. I believe Lipstick Alley has a Meghan conspiracy thread that they would enjoy.

by Anonymousreply 519April 8, 2019 3:29 PM

I found the link if there are any takers.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 520April 8, 2019 3:31 PM

Thanks r520!! There you go, folks, your very own thread to post all your conspiracy theories!

by Anonymousreply 521April 8, 2019 3:35 PM

LSA for those who don't know is site whose target demographic is black americans and black diaspora in general. They don't welcome white folks particularly those who racist reasons for disliking MM.

by Anonymousreply 522April 8, 2019 4:08 PM

R522 that’s true but the LSA MM thread posted above was created just for people who want to talk about the conspiracy theories that derail this thread.

by Anonymousreply 523April 8, 2019 4:11 PM

I think MM is pregnant but find it fascinating that the rumors have gained so much traction that they've made the mainstream outlets and are not just relegated to the gossip sites. That the DM and others have even given light to this conspiracy and feel comfortable publishing it is interesting.

Again, I think she is pregnant but I don't understand the vitriol some on this thread have towards others who question her pregnancy. Nothing about this women is above board or on the level. It should be no surprise that her behavior leads to this sort of speculation. The BRF and the press they've received have turned into a circus.

by Anonymousreply 524April 8, 2019 4:13 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 525April 8, 2019 4:19 PM

Tatler have have run the story of the refusal of royal doctors.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 526April 8, 2019 4:19 PM

Whoops, running away with my haves.

by Anonymousreply 527April 8, 2019 4:19 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 528April 8, 2019 4:19 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 529April 8, 2019 4:23 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 530April 8, 2019 4:26 PM

Camilla's diamonds at the Olivier Awards.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 531April 8, 2019 4:31 PM

The Queen looking at all of the cards she received on her 80th birthday. Does she get more as she gets older? LOL.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 532April 8, 2019 4:38 PM

Zara all dolled up with a horse.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 533April 8, 2019 4:40 PM

Kate's new look is the subject of the Hello cover story.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 534April 8, 2019 4:41 PM

Luke, bf and Miami friends in London town.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 535April 8, 2019 4:46 PM

Sorry wrong thread.

by Anonymousreply 536April 8, 2019 4:50 PM

The Queen on the royal yacht Brittania. She and the family had some wonderful memories of their time on this yacht. I've never seen the Royal Family so emotional as on the day that the Brittania was decommissioned.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 537April 8, 2019 4:54 PM

Prince Charles with baby George.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 538April 8, 2019 4:58 PM

Diana's father wasn't bad looking as a young man.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 539April 8, 2019 4:59 PM

Prince William finds Meghan "difficult".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 540April 8, 2019 5:03 PM

R539 VERY VERY HANDSOME! Stunning spencer genes (Charles children are gorgeous.)

by Anonymousreply 541April 8, 2019 5:05 PM

A beautiful photo of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 542April 8, 2019 5:09 PM

The InTouch tabloid has the William cheating with Rose Hanbury story on its front page.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 543April 8, 2019 5:11 PM

I don't like her dress which looks like slip but I love her choker and earrings.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 544April 8, 2019 5:12 PM

Details of the Sussex Cotswold rental. Have they given it up or not?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 545April 8, 2019 5:16 PM

We were wondering , recently, who would move in to Nottingham Cottage next, and Hello have suggested it could be Bea and Mozzi. After all, Eug and Jack are next door in Ivy Cottage, and the sisters shared for years. Here's a look at some of the former residents, including the Queen's disgraced former nanny.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 546April 8, 2019 5:28 PM

To add to that, I forgot about that OTHER back shot of Sparkle and Dim ^^^^

by Anonymousreply 547April 8, 2019 5:29 PM

Tasteful friends, Bea's beau has an Instagram account for his property development company. Lots of fabulous white interiors. What do you think? @edomapellimozzi if the link doesn't work.

I hope they marry, the BRF could use a little Italian spice. He's cute.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 548April 8, 2019 5:40 PM

At Christmas Kate walked in on Meghan providing manual stimulation to Prince Phillip's organ. Harry knows about it and condones it, but Kate and William are really unhappy about the arrangement. Charles has stayed out of it, which fuels the suspicions about his relationship with Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 549April 8, 2019 5:42 PM

R548 Just had a little nose, Fergie follows his page, but not Eug, nor Andy. Fergie must be salivating, lol.

by Anonymousreply 550April 8, 2019 5:45 PM

R539 - He was one of the great catches of his day, and her mother was besotted with him. She was also nearly exactly the same number of years younger than he when they married as Diana was when she married Charles.

by Anonymousreply 551April 8, 2019 5:46 PM

Does the queen really expect to control what her great-grandchild eats?

by Anonymousreply 552April 8, 2019 5:48 PM

r552 You actually believe that story? MeMe isn't a vegan, why would she raise a vegan child?

by Anonymousreply 553April 8, 2019 6:01 PM

The Sohobébé is going to be one screwed up kid with these two narcissist clowns as parents. I hope they hire a relatively "normal" nanny who is a good person with some substance. The nanny can teach this child right from wrong and some good manners.

by Anonymousreply 554April 8, 2019 6:02 PM

SohoBébé will be absolutely, positively, 100% vegan — and that's vegan for ethical reasons, not "plant-based" — when it isn't Mr. Fister deep in some sea bream.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 555April 8, 2019 6:03 PM

Or sniffing turkey

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 556April 8, 2019 6:05 PM

Or wearing a diaper made from the skin of baby lambs

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 557April 8, 2019 6:09 PM

Or waxing rhapsodic about "delicious, on trend, and dead sexy" short ribs...

[quote]Today on The Tig, these handsome fellas have shared a dish that’s sure to make you and your Valentine’s hearts go pitter pat and your bellies go to bed mighty happy. Braised short rib in Barolo sauce? Um, yes, please and thank you. Cheers to happy hearts and full bellies!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 558April 8, 2019 6:15 PM

R287 That weave is hilarious.

by Anonymousreply 559April 8, 2019 6:17 PM

R437 I'm the one who posted the photo of Harry and his Sentabale friend. My point was not that Harry's gay. My point was this guy, Chris, (an out gay) is one of his few good-looking friends. The others in England, who put down MM, are ugly and immature.

I don't think Harry is gay. Maybe bi but I doubt it.

by Anonymousreply 560April 8, 2019 6:38 PM

R560 How do you know they’re all “immature”? Have you ever met any of them? And what do their looks have to do with anything?

Can only ugly/immature people dislike Markle?

by Anonymousreply 561April 8, 2019 6:43 PM

Princess Eugenie spoke at the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE) 19th Alliance against Trafficking in Persons Conference. What a mouthful!

She looks good with auburn hair. This color is far more flattering than the dark brown she sports.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 562April 8, 2019 7:05 PM

The trip to Morocco was to obtain a suitably brown baby in a country with a bankrupt legal system. As soon as the bump is deflated there will be a speeding black merecedes in her future with Harry basking in the public’s sympathy.

by Anonymousreply 563April 8, 2019 7:14 PM

R554. I hope MM is an uninterested mother. That sounds cruel, but an uninterested mother will mean that any nanny she hires has a better chance of staying around for some length of time. If the reports of how she treats staff are true; however, there will be a revolving door of nannies. Nannies at that level have their pick of client. That kid will never have any stability. I think the only reason Princess Margaret's kids turned out okay is because they had the Queen in their corner. This kid will have no one.

by Anonymousreply 564April 8, 2019 7:22 PM

I am enjoying the MeGain tattle but I also love seeing the pics people are posting here of Royals/Aristocracy from over the years. Diana’s father the Earl was BEAUTIFUL! Does anyone have some great pics of Prince Philip when he was younger? I know he was super hot.

by Anonymousreply 565April 8, 2019 7:33 PM

R564 - The Queen was said to be particularly close to her niece, Sarah Chatto. And both the younger Snowden's marriages seem to have been reasonably successful.

R564 - I doubt it is possible for MM to be an "uninterested" mother. She is, contrariwise, likely to be an extremely controlling one, as narcissists see offspring as extensions of themselves. You can be exceptionally controlling whilst simultaneously neglecting a child's emotional needs if you only see the child as something to fulfill your needs.

God knows, we see it enough on this planet.

by Anonymousreply 566April 8, 2019 7:34 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 567April 8, 2019 7:58 PM

I don’t think she’ll be disinterested, but I could see her not being particularly loving. Or, at least, one of those mothers who is very loving when there’s someone around to witness it.

Young children & babies are no fun to be around - even when they’re your own.

by Anonymousreply 568April 8, 2019 8:05 PM

How can the Queen stop MM from having her baby vegan? Can they take the child from her if the baby is BRF property?

by Anonymousreply 569April 8, 2019 8:34 PM

Some of the conspiracy theorists have no grip on reality. While Hollywood has a history of age-fudging, how would Meghan get away with that, least of all with her tabloid-loving family? You don't think Sister Sammy would run to the DM or Us Weekly if she could prove Meghan had shaved off 3-4 years? Wouldn't be difficult, and she could get a couple hundred tweets out of it.

by Anonymousreply 570April 8, 2019 8:39 PM

R570 Maybe she is saving it for her about-to-be-released Tell All?

by Anonymousreply 571April 8, 2019 8:43 PM

The Queen will cut them out of her will if they don't OBEY! The whore can forget about getting her hands on any Jewels to wear!

by Anonymousreply 572April 8, 2019 8:47 PM

R571 if she had the foresight to plan ahead, she would've tried sucking up to Meghan when she got with Harry. This family is incapable of playing the long game. Very disappointing.

by Anonymousreply 573April 8, 2019 8:48 PM

She's planning on a Natural birth! that's what I read, but who knows?!

Bet gonna be breech

by Anonymousreply 574April 8, 2019 8:50 PM

I suspect MM will be both disinterested AND controlling, like Angelina Jolie. She’ll have the nanny do the grunt work and have her bring the picture-perfect thing around for photo ops. And then she’ll hand it back when it gets ornery or stinky. But she’ll require detailed notes on feedings and schedules and she’ll dictate everything the nanny is to do.

by Anonymousreply 575April 8, 2019 8:51 PM

R574, for the entirety of human history, and the foreseeable future, childbirth is a crapshoot. Haha. You can make all the plans you want, but that baby arrives when and how it wants. I suppose one can schedule a C-section for convenience, but even then, a woman can go into labor early. Those little parasites are completely unpredictable. You think you’re having a water/hypno birth and then the next day you’re on an operating table with your innards on a tray.

by Anonymousreply 576April 8, 2019 8:54 PM

This will set her off! She's NOT important enough to be CORE.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 577April 8, 2019 9:10 PM

I see Bea's boyf has been talking to the Torygraph. I wonder if he had permission. Annoyingly behind a paywall. Look what MeGain has started. Once upon a time the partners of Royals were silent and didn't talk to the press.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 578April 8, 2019 9:19 PM

This thread is filling up fast so here is the next Part 36. Please fill up this one before using the next one. Thanks.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 579April 8, 2019 9:19 PM

bump

by Anonymousreply 580April 8, 2019 9:24 PM

Bea definitely looks much better with the auburn color in her hair, and a bit of curl. She looks pretty in r578, and she never looks pretty.

by Anonymousreply 581April 8, 2019 9:27 PM

Orders, medals and sashes.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 582April 8, 2019 9:37 PM

Charles was pretty slim until recently. Now he looks bloated and red.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 583April 8, 2019 9:41 PM

Charles has worn a beard a few times in his life. He always went back to clean shaven.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 584April 8, 2019 9:42 PM

Subjects,

"CORE" is neither kind, delicious, on trend, nor dead sexy. Verily, I should not endeavour to wish this "CORE" upon my being, nor that of the beings of My Love nor that of The Royal SohoBébé. N'est-ce pas, commoners?

"CORE" being the dictat of Speech known as the acrimonious, thereby rendering the consciousness to signify thusly: [bold]C[/bold]oal-stained [bold]O[/bold]bdurate [bold]R[/bold]aging [bold]E[/bold]gomaniac. Sounds like some old duchess, it does; she whom shall never reach the cloud-scrapingly vaulted levels of moi. So sad for she, for she is not me!

Nay, no part of this "CORE" is heretofore beholden unto my sun-flecked, dew-dappled, juicy countenance. In fact, I spit venom upon it.

by Anonymousreply 585April 8, 2019 9:43 PM

That tiara and necklace look mighty heavy!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 586April 8, 2019 9:45 PM

I am not a fan of Sparkle, but the California Birth Index lists the following Birth:

Name: Rachel Meghan Markle

Birth Date: August 4 1981

Gender: Female

Mother's Maiden Name: Ragland

Birth County: Los Angeles

by Anonymousreply 587April 8, 2019 9:45 PM

R586

I think that's the Greville necklace.

It can also be split into 2 different necklaces: 1 with 2 strings of diamonds and the other with 3 strings of diamonds.

by Anonymousreply 588April 8, 2019 9:50 PM

Female here. For some insane reason it is a thing among some women to give birth. C sections can be embarrassing. It really is a thing. Even Paltrow admitted she was too embarrassed to admit to a C section. I never believed Meg wasn't pregnant and thought the rumors were just on here. I was amazed they are in comments on articles on every website. Still, I thought it was crazy. Until I saw the video of her walking where her belly is jiggling back and forth. That was too insane. Rich people can hide all sorts of things from the public, think of her friend George Clooney. Even the press knows who is closeted and protects them but throws shade. So who knows? I can see where some people think that is what is happening with the articles about people not believing she is pregnant . I don't know why she would care if there is a surrogate but some women feel they are not really women if the don't experience pregnancy and natural childbirth.

by Anonymousreply 589April 8, 2019 10:01 PM

R588 - Yes, I've seen it with two strands rather than four. Frankly, I rather prefer it with two. Four is, erm, over-egging the pudding. But lusty Camilla doesn't seem bothered.

Greville also left the Queen Mum some huge ropes of pearls and, of course, the Greville Kokoshnik tiara Yuge wore at her wedding in October.

I wonder what else she left that found its way into the royal collection?

by Anonymousreply 590April 8, 2019 10:03 PM

Answering my own question above, the Greville Bequest consisted of:

The Greville Tiara The Greville Kokoshnik diamond-emerald tiara The Greville Festoon diamond necklace The Greville Diamond Chandelier Earrings The Ruby and Diamond Floral Necklace (I think Kate was leant this once) and has matching earrings The Greville (HUGE) Diamond Drop (assume it's a pendant) The Greville Diamond Ivy Leaf earrings The Greville (magnificent) Emerald and Diamond Necklace

Or, put another way by our forthright cousins across the Pond: "Them that has, gets."

by Anonymousreply 591April 8, 2019 10:11 PM

R520 - It isn't the moronic ideas about Meghan's kid becoming Sovereign that are as bothersome as the simply appalling grammar, spelling, and usage.

by Anonymousreply 592April 8, 2019 10:12 PM

Bea looks half decent here - she has her mouth closed.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 593April 8, 2019 10:41 PM

And sometimes Bea is meh!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 594April 8, 2019 10:42 PM

The "Duchess of Pork" name calling was rampant during Fergie's pregnancies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 595April 8, 2019 10:43 PM

She should wear that color more frequently.

by Anonymousreply 596April 8, 2019 10:43 PM

Fergie and Andy - Goofballs Part 1.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 597April 8, 2019 10:45 PM

Fergie and Andy - Goofballs Part 2.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 598April 8, 2019 10:45 PM

Eugenie in red.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 599April 8, 2019 10:46 PM

Eugenie in purple.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 600April 8, 2019 10:46 PM

Oh my. There are no words.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 601April 8, 2019 10:47 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!