British Royal Family Gossip: Part 68

Prince Harry in uniform at the Royal Hospital in Chelsea.

William joined D-Day veterans, and members of the public, at a service in Heroes’ Square at the National Memorial Arboretum, before laying a wreath at the Normandy Campaign Memorial.

Theresa May needs curtseying lessons - her dip is nothing short of terrifying. That said, she looked unusually creditable yesterday in her green overcoat and saucer hat.

As for that black and white wedding photo released by Harry and Meghan: it encapsulates their relationship perfectly: he's looking at her, she's looking at the camera.

Did the Cambridges continually leak private wedding photos a year after their wedding?

Andrew at the "D-Day 75 Garden" at Chelsea.

The Sussex Royal post today.

Prince Charles met Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the D-Day event.

Same gesture, different time - Grandpa Charles at his mother's coronation vs. Grandson George on the Buckingham Palace balcony at the Trooping The Colour.

I wonder if the Queen still has this god awful canopy in her bedroom?

Photos of Camilla and Charles at Bayeux Cathedral and Cemetery in France for D-Day.

More photos of Charles and Camilla at the Service of Remembrance at Bayeux Cathedral.

Camilla's triple-strand pearl necklace and huge diamond clasp is quite . . . something. She has worked out an endearingly over the top Duchess style, hasn't she, with the enormous hats, pearl chokers, and coatdresses with mainsail bottoms?

[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.]

Harry should have repeated his WE day speech, you know where he says this

You are the most engaged generation in history. You care about values, doing the right thing, and championing the causes that will shape your future.

Harry is a hypocrite.

R13 - I don't share Harry's glowing assessment about the younger generation. Many of them have been so sheltered and coddled by their parents that I don't know if they have what it takes to fight for their country.

I've never found Harry very attractive and he sure is aging quickly.

The old generation saw 18 year old men go to war, and now we have coddled adults that have breakdowns in public over not getting what they want.

And who equate free speech with literal murder, R17.

Just to be a bit pedantic for a second - I looked at the Sussex instagram and it had one of my pet peeves on it - using 'whom' when 'who' is more correct in order to appear clever - "The Founder’s Day Parade is a day to celebrate ‘The Chelsea Pensioners’, the name for those veterans who live there, and an important reminder of the great debt we owe all whom have served their nation."

Even saying that sentence in your own head it sounds wrong, it's awkward. It's like people who say 'classical' when they mean 'classic' because it's a longer word, but it has the opposite effect making them look like they're trying too hard.

I said I was going to be pedantic...

It is word choices like that that suggest MeMe is writing or editing the account.

The Sussex Insta caption describes Harry's visit and then goes on to say that his visit "coincides with the 75th anniversary of D-Day." I haven't checked, but I'm betting (or hoping) the other royal accounts mentioned D-Day first.

Yeah, I feel like someone who did this for a living probably wouldn't have made that mistake, plus it fits in with what we take to be her try-hard personality. Honestly, I know it's so pedantic but people using longer words when a shorter one would be better really rubs me up the wrong way, it's so transparent.

The "young people are shitty and not as good as my generation" comments sound like the canasta table at a nursing home rather than a gossip thread.

Edward the VIII, a self indulgent idiot, was generally regarded as miserable in exile, with no meaningful role and surrounded by increasingly sketchy, shallow people. Even Wallis Simpson conceded by the 1960s that no one was interested in them as social figures anymore. Their glamour and relevance faded.

The same thing will happen to Megantoinette and Harry if they leave England (and to a degree even if they don't, though they could presumably muster the rcurrent egard for the Dukes of Kent or Gloucester and Princess Alexandra or the Wessexes if they behave or Duke of York if they don't. If there's one thing evident already, if British royalty acts like a celebrity (York, his daughters) they don't get praise they get scorn. On the other hand, Megantoinette, having harmed Harry's standing, probably won't have the good grace to stick by him. She will divorce him for his own ends and he'll probably come back to England, a genial figure fooled, remarry and then be Duke of Kent or Gloucester. Still, shame he has to sacrifice respect and affection in the interim. Still. his bad choices too.

He also acted out at the Investiture, R24. That was his choice. As was the choice to slag off the greatest generation and to knock the heads of 2 little boys together in front of cameras, as was it his choice to pull sulky faces at an official event. Harry CHOSE Me-Gain, clearly in part to express his resentment for his family and his contempt for them and for the British taxpayers. That cannot be blamed on her. They are both just awful.

[R24] The Kent and Gloucester titles are taken. He already has a dukedom, Sussex.

R23 - Are you suggesting that elders playing cards don't gossip?

R26 - I don't think the poster meant "literally" be Duke of Gloucester or Kent, but "like" them: royal dukes whose public presences and importance have faded, such as they were, and who are of little interest to the public.

R27 I'm saying that griping about "what's wrong with young people" sounds like grumpy old men. If the biddies around the canasta table are gossiping about who is ground zero for the clap infection spreading through the facility, then I'm all in.

Ford is closing a plant in Wales. I think Brexit is just beginning its brutality on Britain. Whining royals and extravagance are not going to play well.

R29 - what can't you comprehend about the word "Many" as opposed to "All"?

Photos of William commemorating D-Day in Stafford.

He wrote on his poppy wreath: "In memory of all those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. We will remember them. William".

Bloody hell, Bridgend, that is absolutely brutal R30. And yes, you are right. Half of me wants them to stay and endure the backlash of their lives, over the next couple of years. But no, she'll/ they'll be off. No way can she sit there at Froggy Hollow, or wherever the hell she is, in silence. And in respect.

Absolutely gutted for the Bridgend community , reading that.

The Old Girl has a lot of life left in her. I hope.

A funny meme for Thursday. So true, so true.

I love the smile on Obama's face at his state dinner. No need for the Queen to wear the Burmese ruby tiara to ward off evil for him. LOL. Swipe for photos of the Queen with other US Presidents.

The pose in the wedding picture is beyond standard fare as far as wedding pictures go, R3. I, and many other brides and grooms, have been directed by photographers to get shots just like these. Meghan and Harry are following instructions given by someone paid to get good shots. Simple.

Seriously, the nit-picking is insane.

R37 - I'll accept that, but in this particular case, I think these two realities dovetail. And the Cambridges didn't, so far as I know, continually release arty wedding photos of themselves publicly a year later. My opinion that this photo just happens to reflect the truth of their relationships remains unchanged.

R3

I doubt it. She looks shopped in. And who cares about their wedding last year anyway. Revisiting everything that happened last year is desperate and lame.

Spot on, R38.

But I bet you aren't a control freak, like some, R37 , who is obsessed by "finding their light" ;-)

R33 - Seconding the Bridgend comment. Along those lines, one of the worst aspects of the now-notorious OTT luxury baby shower in Manhattan was that it took place the same week Honda announced it was closing its plant in Swindon, costing something like 3,500 jobs. I'm sure the Honda workers getting the news were just gobsmacked to see the newest member of the royal gravy train, whose cottage their taxes were helping to renovate, guzzling luxury with her celebrity BFFs in New York and flying home on a private plane. The optics simply couldn't have been worse - and the BRF was well aware of it. Bottom line, though - she just doesn't give a fuck, and it shows.

Swindon workers should have gone to Windsor and demonstrated.

Anyway, DLers! Are we going to have a TTC Watch Party on Saturday?

I must admit, I was a bit drunk after Gabriella's wedding, and woke up on the sofa covered in Pringles and sour cream dip.

I'm so common.

George and Lottie will steal the show at TTC, not bloated, desperate Meghan or congenial Kate. Unless the narcissistic one decides to suckle Archie in the middle of the ceremony just because she could.

I ‘ll poor myself a gin and tonic to watch the TTC . And think of the queen when I do because its one of her favorites .

R43 - Pringles? PRINGLES? Where is your sense of tradition?!

I'm shameful R46, I got that giddy on frocks, hats and a couple of drinks, I wasn't capable of much else.

I will be better prepared for Saturday. LOL.

Me-Gain is a greedy narc. Her being packaged as a humanitarian was merely the strategy Sunshine Sachs used to raise her profile. Her treatment of her father and extended family on both sides, not to mention her behavior toward the BRF (the family she never had, lol!) and the UK taxpayers communicates her character quite clearly.

Despite having pretty much hit the jackpot and vaulting from the Z list to Kensington Palace, our Rach has not stopped to savor her good fortune. Rather, she has been a source of chaos and destruction even before the wedding - leaking negative stories about Catherine and making her cry over her treatment of toddler Charlotte. She is a bitch and does not even bother to try to hide it. Nothing is never enough for such people. Harry is going to learn a lesson he will never forget. I do feel sorry for their child.

R38, the danger in comparing the Cambridge's and the Sussexes is that their relationships are fundamentally different.

Kate is seriously minding her every step and doing everything not to outshine her husband or rock the boat in anyway. Her first few years were rocky but she adapted. She's the safe choice that will do as she's told without question and not cause worry.

Meghan is the outside choice. Harry is happy to show off his wife and glory in their relationship, something he knows his brother can't/won't do because of expectations.

Unfortunately, when you have a career of your own before entering an institution like the BRF, old habits die hard. The same way Meghan had to cut off troublesome family members, she needs to cut off attention seeking friends.

Hopefully, Meghan will fall in line, just as her SIL eventually did. The marriage is still new and she's well within the adjustment window Kate had; there are bigger train wrecks trying to (re)enter the BRF. I'm here for a double wedding featuring the DoY/Fergie and Beatrice/Edo/Sister-Wife Dara.

R49 - I take your points, but Edo and Bea (never mind Fergie) aren't senior "working" royals on the SG payroll. They'll be entertaining as train wrecks, but not infuriating, like the sight of the recently minted Duchess on the SG payroll lapping it up while Swindon workers wonder how they're going to feed the kids next year.

R48 I agree and watching the slow motion train wreck from a distance is quite enjoyable.

I have come to think of Meghan Markle as Diana's Revenge: "So you guys thought I was bad?? Just and wait and see who my son marries!"

Please, the people of the UK have no one to blame for Brexit other than themselves. They voted for it, got it and now want to cry wolf because their xenophobic actions ended up costing them their livelihoods.

The BRF is not allowed to be political and will carry on as usual. Crying about the optics of a baby shower is ludicrous in the grand scheme of things.

Optics are everything for ceremonial roles that cost money. Everything.

R50, I get what you're saying about the baby shower and, initially, I felt the same way until I realized Meghan likely doesn't have close girlfriends in the UK that would throw her a shower.

Seriously, it's her first baby and must have been a joyous time but there's no way she wasn't lonely. I'd let it slide...if she does it with subsequent kids...yeah, she's really trying the limits.

The workers losing jobs is not the fault of the BRF and I don't expect them to take austerity measures when the public voted for Brexit. The public needs to protest the politicians that helped get them into this mess.

r30 The rumour is the jobs are moving to Mexico in which case they would be moving anyway. Brexit is a useful excuse rather than admitting the Car industry has massive over capacity and needs to cut costs.

I do like MM's instagram post where she mentions herself, who was not at any events but relegates the Duchess of Cornwall (Or Princess of Wales) and Duchess of Cambridge to "other members of the royal family". Some mean girl antics right there.

r54 Except none of those people at the baby shower were close friends of hers. She has known some of them a year at the most. Gail King, she hadn't even met before. Who invites a person they don't know to their baby shower? It seems to have been a business meeting masquerading as a baby shower.

Before and After.

Princess Margaret with her Sealyham terrier.

Oh my gosh it looks like they made her an entirely new face. That is spooky.

Didn't Princess Margaret frolic with a shady gangster-type fellow down in Mustique?

On Throwback Thursday, here are photos of Kate at her various Trooping The Colour appearances.

R52 - That's like saying why focus on the Abdication when the Jarrow Walk was taking place to demand help from Parliament for the poverty and joblessness up north? And by the way, the government did then just what it does now: lip service, no action, and the papers went back to whingeing about Edward VIII's personal life.

R53 is right. For an institution like the BRF, optics are everything. They know it. Their survival and retention of their immense privileges depends on their ability NOT to do what Meghan Markle did at that baby shower, not on BREXIT, which is a political situation and out of their hands.

You want to talk BREXIT - we can open a thread later when the results of the Peterborough by-election are in.

And by the way, BREXIT hasn't happened yet and every factory closure and job loss isn't due to the vote on 23 June 2016.

This is a gossip thread about members of the BRF.

Diana's parents.

^Forgot to add that the Jarrow Walk took place in October 1936, as the Abdication crisis was heating up.

For those of you unfamiliar with it, during the ghastly thirties, hundreds of men from Jarrow, a particularly hard-hit area of the Tyneside, walked to London to demand help for the grinding poverty there.

The North remains England's economic stepchild, by the way.

Charles and Camilla in the Bayeux cemetery.

R26, try to follow along. I meant he can assume that kind of regard when he returns to the UK post divorce.

I love how Camilla is such a relaxed alcoholic.

It's Tiara Time...King George VI gave this Cartier aquamarine and diamond tiara to his wife (eg. the Queen Mum) and she in turn gave it to Princess Anne. Anne had the tiara remodeled and shortened. She used the removed elements to create a brooch and matching necklace. Here are some photos of the two ladies wearing the tiara and necklace.

I would take her job. She probably has an opium pipe in her handbag.

Everyone turns to watch Trump deliver his state dinner speech. Everyone but Anne. Love her shade.

Bridgend closing is part of a £14billion global restructuring and cost-cutting plan by Ford. They’ve cut production in Spain, France and Russia as well as Germany. so 3 other EU countries are affected The Welsh Govt is annoyed because Ford has taken a lot in grant money but is sending it all off to Mexico in effect.

Thanks, R68. Anne wore the pineflower tiara to the state dinner. It was the first time I'd ever seen. The pictures of her were not the best so it was hard to make out the detail even enlarged. (and the most interesting thing about the pictures is that she was paired with that awful Jared Kushner)

R 71 And can’t they ask that money or a slice of it back from Ford ? Because when it was given to secure work in Wales and they are moving to Mexico now they have no right on it . If I was Welsh Gov i would ask some money back .

Diana really did get the best features of both her parents. Her siblings are all quite plain by comparison.

If Meghan had had a low-key, private baby shower somewhere, nobody would have said boo, even if it did cost a fortune. It was the obvious parading of wealth that got under everyone's skin. It was tacky and insensitive, given what the common people of Britain are facing.

Was it right after that NYC babyshower that she got shuttled off to Morocco with her horrid $100k dress that was meant for the oscars

R76 - Yes.

Godparent speculation.

It took several years but Kate finally learned that updos for such events are probably best. What a transformation.

Jeez, she didn't throw herself the shower! That's the point: it's planned for you. The BRF knew and still allowed her to go; they approved, she went and then went to Morocco. If she had a small shower, you would be laughing that she doesn't have friends; she's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

When has every British subject been so financially buoyant that the wealth of the BRF wouldn't rub someone the wrong way?

[quote] Royal commentator Omid Scobie claimed to Yahoo‘s The Royal Box that Markle will likely attend the annual event that celebrates Queen Elizabeth’s birthday, Trooping the Colour, but then will take the summer off to enjoy her first few months as a new mother in the luxury and gorgeous setting that is the couple’s home, Frogmore Cottage.

Frog Cottage gorgeous ? Always spinning our M .

This is funny.

R68, Thanks for the link - it looks like a gorgeous piece of jewelry.

Also is that Princess Anne's natural hair color? Kind of seems like it might be considering that there are strands of gray hair showing.

[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.]

So much drama for this year's TTC. Will this be the last year that we see Harry with actual hair on his head before the baldy genes triumphs once and for all? Will Meg be leaking boob juice in her usual ill-fitted albeit expensive outfit? Will Lottie give Meg the side-eye to avenge for making her mom cry postpartum tears? Will George say "not allowed" to uncle Harry when the Sussexes try to take the center spot away from him and his dad? Will the unfortunate York sisters bother to invest in industrial strength bras and Spanx, or will they compete with Camilla for who will have the saggiest tits and most matronly body?

Just popped in to block all of the MM loons before blocking the entire thread!

R86 - goodbye then. You won't be missed.

For Anne to complete twice as many engagements as Edward or Andrew suggests a) she's not obligated to "work" as much as she does, and b) she enjoys what she does or finds it stimulating in some way. Granted, handing out awards and unveiling plaques isn't the most scintillating, but it does sound like she gets to visit some interesting places and meets interesting people. It's almost like being on a school field trip as an adult and can you ask all sorts of questions to satisfy her curiosity. Maybe she even gets to pick where she goes. The first sounds distinctly up her alley as a farologist who likes sailing. And who wouldn't like to learn what hydrographics are see demos?

[quote]n February she visited the Glasgow College of Nautical Studies on the banks of the Clyde while in April she she opened the UK's new Hydrographic Office headquarters in Taunton.

So Andrew and Edward clocked in with 37 and 30 engagements, respectively. What do these people do with the other 120 or so free days they had from Jan. through May? How do they fill their days? Horseback riding, gardening, shooting, long strolls in the country, I can't imagine what I'd do with myself if I so much free time.

R85 - all interesting questions. All will be revealed in a couple of days.

Princess Anne takes a spill.

Anne and Charles riding together.

Oh, please, you know when a shower is thrown for her and her friends knew exactly what type of shower she wanted. Over the top. The sad thing is that baby showers are not done in Britain so the whole thing looked ridiculously extravagant. She would have done better to have a quiet one, with family and close friends over tea and cake. But of course none of her family was there which made the whole thing look like a gift and merching grab.

The security show while absolutely nobody gave a fuck was pretty great. Markle truly delivered an amazing year of drama.

R93, and that’s what Meghan can count on if she moves here to NYC. People going about their business and ignoring her.

I’ve seen Anne Coulter and Woody Allen several times in my neighborhood and nobody looks twice. Two absolutely reviled celebrities and they are studiously ignored. She may have to go to Smollet lengths to get any notice.

You mean the pen of paps with ordinary NYC citizens strolling by not giving a fuck? I think that was a good example of Media Construct, or in other words, phony baloney.

R43 Sounds like my kind of party tbh. I might muster up a Pimm's to pair with my Cheesy Wotsits come the weekend.

As for Meg's first year, some of the things I believe were actual missteps (baby shower - I don't think the BRF knew this was happening - not in the style it happened, anyway, obvious maternity style at Yuge's wedding, mishandling of the situation with her father) and others I believe were very minor, if they were anything at all (being "kicked out" of the garden party - I don't think this happened, the Investiture - which just looked like maybe Harry and Meg got confused about where to stand or what to do and a couple of footmen helped them out, which doesn't seem to be a very big deal).

The dynamic so far seems to be Meghan not taking advice and Harry choosing to play the role of loyal companion to scolded partner rather than helping hand as she settles in. In some ways I blame Harry more than MM herself for the fuckups this year. His petulant "what Meghan wants Meghan gets" attitude has actually been more harmful to his wife than his guiding hand in her new life would have been.

It'll be interesting to see if she's more subdued post maternity leave or if the weird stubbornness continues. Right now I believe she's writing the IG posts (they're probably also being seen by a proofreader or similar before being posted?) so it's not quite the 'hiding away' some are describing it as.

Look away now, sensitive gossip souls, for I am about the speak of Celebitchy. Remember when Kaiser and Ko. were repeating on a daily basis that MM would work on a daily basis right up until giving birth and then take a very short maternity leave because Kate is evil and lazy and Meghan is a real feminist who loves work and being a real humanitarian? I don't suppose there has been any mention of the months long confinement over there, or has there?

Looking forward to the clothes and hats and family dynamics this weekend but tbh am a bit bored with royal fashion. It's funny because MM is actually in a perfect position to be a snazzier dresser than Kate, who is both not really allowed to go crazy with fashion and possibly not inclined to, either (left to her own devices I don't think the DoC would be seen in much more than her skinnies and a striped top all the time). I confess I actually liked the blue and white Oscar de la Renta dress she wore to that wedding last year. Her hair was nice that day, too.

[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.]

That's what I wrote in the last thread, for Meghan to have the sort of fawning or attention she'd have to move to LA not NYC. Plus the sort of paps in LA are more the sort that she'd crave, you know to further her poor-me-leave-me-alone narrative to portray herself as victim a la Diana.

Vinegar, London, United Kingdom, 2 days ago

Why is this not emblazoned across this paper just as the fable was? The truth is always less entertaining

ReplyNew Comment

14

122

Rated

IcyGal, Seattle, United States, 2 days ago

Just another day of DM making things up and calling it "anonymous sources"

myopinion27, SILVER SPRING, United States, 2 days ago

DM ever time you cooked a story up you either put the blame on a "so called source" or The Sun. Every single time! Take accountability for your made up stories. We all know you people care nothing but clickbaits.

ReplyNew Comment

14

217

Rated

green_ginger, london, United Kingdom, 2 days ago

Why is this not higher up on this page the way it was with the original story? Let me guess, the truth never sells as much as the lies. Especially when it comes to this woman.

Another meme.

Prince Andrew taking a photo of the family while the Queen and Philip drive by.

If the tabs in England are allowed to write outrageous lies, why aren’t they sued? Aren’t there stringent laws against it? Can they hide behind anonymous “sources”?

The “Meghan staying at the Clooneys” story was published in an Australian tabloid (with lots of details) but it’s the only one that did. No one else touched it. Does that mean it’s bullshit or too close to the truth?

Damn, if Omid Scooby-doo says she'll be there than by hook or by crook her weird mouth piece had made clear her intention. If she doesn't show to TTC then she got shut down and told to stay home by the grey suits.

(Here's to hoping we don't have to see her Octomom face.)

R79 - You're missing the point. We all know she didn't throw the party herself. We all know that the Queen is one of the richest women in the world and that Charles is worth 400 million personally and that Harry and William have trust funds thanks to their parents' divorce.

It's precisely because of that that lavish displays of conspicuous consumption, especially from someone trumpeting her wonderful "values", are a bad idea.

And lastly, she may not have thrown herself the baby shower, but she did agree to fly back in a private plane whilst her husband bleated about climate change, and she did spend nearly a million quid on designer clothes - most of which looked appalling on her.

Meghan hasn't learnt the art of enjoying unearned wealth without rubbing the taxpayers' face in it. It's the one art the BRF could instruct her in, as they are past masters of it. But she won't listen.

And they didn't "allow" her to go. I doubt she asked their permission.

I've always wondered if Queen Elizabeth keeps a diary writes about her life. I know she had one when she was young and I hope she continued the habit. She's given few interviews ( I can think of the recent coronation special off the top of my head) so no one knows what she really thinks. Of course, if she does write down her impressions, what a great historic read it would be. It would be interesting to read about her long life, the places she's been, the people she's met, her views on current events etc... However, it wouldn't surprise me if one of her children would burn the more controversial parts (would they read them?) after she died just to keep her mystique in place and so much history would be lost.

R96 - "I confess I actually liked the blue and white Oscar de la Renta dress she wore to that wedding last year. Her hair was nice that day, too."

You had me (mostly) up until that sentence.

But you have forgotten the leaks from Down Under about how abusive she was to staff, the nasty leaks about Kate via Lainey, the astronomical wardrobe expense, the absolutely ridiculous secrecy around her kid's birth, as if Archie were the Second Coming and the birth to be hidden to head off Herod's minions coming for the First Born, the inappropriate clothes, and having her friends drop the Archbishop of Canterbury's name in a sleazy PEOPLE Magazine article, anonymously, to show how Deeply Spiritual she is.

Sorry - those aren't minor errors. Those are the footprints of a narcissistic bitch.

And she looked so bad in that de la Renta that the design house itself hastily took down their photos of her in within a few hours. She couldn't even walk in it.

The burning of diaries is what was done to Victoria's wasn't it? By one of her daughters, who had assumed the this is what her brother would have wanted.

R80 - Well, if Scobie said she's going, now she has to. As for the description of Frogmore Cottage: I'm sure it's very nice, but if luxury and gorgeous are the criteria, give me a suite at The Goring any day.

I loathe celebrities who bleat on about climate change while flying all over the world, which is one of the two worst things you can do for the environment (that and eat meat, eggs and dairy). Someone like Harry would have a far higher carbon footprint than the vast majority of people in Britain for this reason. You'd think they'd just shut up about it an avoid drawing attention.

Also, the thing about the Archbishop of Canterbury is laughable. If she wants to parade as being ultra-christian for some reason why would she need to talk to him? why not a local vicar or rector? it's a very important job in the church but that doesn't make him more godly. It's the literalness of these things that bug me - no nuance and it's so transparent.

r99 Why is it not higher up the page? A little something called a State visit followed by D-Day commerations and I think Love Island has started. There were more important news items. Sorry but strange as it seems the world does not revolve around MeMe. She is not entitled to headline stories above anyone else.

r102 You clearly haven't been paying attention Britain is the Libel and Deframation litigation capital of the world. People come over here to sue because of our stringent libel laws. If the Tabs makes something up and people want to sue they do. I suspect those who don't sue do so because it will just give the story more oxygen and expose it to even more people than originally knew about it. In any case just because someone - a celebrity - says something is a lie that does not make it the case.

Years ago Jordan a glamour model amongst other things, gave an interview and got onto the topic of men she had slept with. She named a singer called Gareth Gates and said this was while she was about 8 months pregnant , he was fairly young (maybe 20?) and became famous from one of Simon Cowell's programmes - Pop Idol? He denied it, strenously for years. Jordan was attacked by the media who didn't need much excuse. What do you know, some years later he finally admits that he slept with Jordan when she was pregant with Harvey. I bring this up because celebrities have a tendancy to lie to the media, particularly if they think something is going to harm their image.

Meanwhile, Kate has just arrived to take the salute of the Massed Bands of the Household Division, with her hair up, in a beautifully fitted and tailored cream-coloured Catherine Walker coatdress, wearing the Irish Guards' gold shamrock, and looking ravishingly Princessly, regal, appropriate and pulled together. She's taking the salute by herself, and attending the ceremony herself in central London.

I never have figured out links, someone else will have to put up the photos.

Here we are R112, she looks beautiful.

R102 - The UK tabloids know exactly how far they can go, and have fleets of libel lawyers who can advise them. That's why Meghan and Harry were unbelievably foolish to antagonise them with threats around those very same libel laws the year before they were even engaged, undoubtedly at Meghan's urging because 1) she knew it would be much harder for Harry to break it off afterward, it designated her as The One, and 2) she thought she could head them off at the pass. She failed to understand that there's more than one way to skin a cat, and the tabloids know them all.

In the event there's any truth in the story, suing will ensure that the media outlet brings out the proof - so, even if the suit bankrupts the media outlet, it will be, as they say, a pyrrhic victory.

who wants to follow the Coldstream Guards?

,,,,,,,

She looks awesome, particularly the hairdo. It's SO MUCH better than the stupid piglet curls she used to have.

R113 - More importantly, she looks the way she should: she looks correct; she looks like a future Princess of Wales; she looks like the wife one Heir to the Throne and the mother of another one. And she looks beautiful because she's wearing the clothes, they aren't wearing her. She looks classic. She could have worn this ten years ago and she could probably wear it ten years from now. She's picked up the trick that the Queen and the Queen Mother, in their different ways, understood: it's nailing your look to your role so the two become inseparable, and you are instantly recognisable and understandable and, therefore . . . reassuring.

That's what Kate is for - not to stun, but to warm.

The white/cream coat really stands out in a sea of dark uniforms.

Kate is recycling her Catherine Walker coat.

Love her hair and her coat. Well done.

Duke Dim and MeMe at last year's Trooping The Colour.

Now it's Eugenie and Bea's turn...here are some of their Trooping outfits.

Elizabeth and her sister Margaret.

The Queen meeting Pope John.

The interesting thing about the queen is that it is possible that she isn't very interesting at all - we just don't really know, she is a deliberately blank canvass for most of us. Obviously the fact that has been at the centre of so much over many decades, meeting weekly with many prime-ministers, talking about world affairs, meeting with presidents and emperors means that she personally embodies so much history and that makes her interesting.

But we don't know how she reflects on it in her personal thoughts, how much it moves her, and in many ways she has lived a very sheltered life, protected (literally by security) from the outside world and from most ordinary people and things. The worlds she sees on her television screen, some televised version of ordinary people living their lives, must in some ways seem very far away.

If The Crown is to be believed she would have preferred to have been an ordinary housewife, which she was, for a very short time in Malta before becoming Queen.

Diaries would be very interesting but also in a way might be a let down. We might have to confront the fact that she is after all a very ordinary woman who has happened to meet a lot of not-ordinary people over the course of her life.

Well said R126. I suspect that there is some truth to that.

Am I wrong in thinking that we see Kate out on solo engagements far more than William? Especially of late? Perhaps she just gets more coverage because of her clothes, etc but I feel like lately we've been seeing her out and about on her own an awful lot.

R126 - I have no doubt she's quite ordinary as a person but she's been to some amazing places and has met some extraordinary people in her long life. It would be interesting to hear her views about things. There has been so many changes/advancements/events that have happened during her reign. I'd like to get inside her brain.

The celebrity/popularity of Harry and Megan with some (Instagram) seems to have been the spark that pushed William and Kate to take some big steps up in how they presented themselves. They are both are more confident and sure of their role and it shows. They have a real air of Royalty about them now. And Harry and Megan just look lacking.

Oh yeah I agree R129, like I say, I think she's been made interesting by her experiences which are definitely unique (in a very literal sense). It's just funny to think of who she might also be underneath, how much (or little) she reflects on that and how much insight she has (whether she has a curious and reflective mind or not) which is something more than the accumulation of experience. It must have shaped and formed her to some extent, but we don't know how much it has entered into her internal world and her own reflections or ideas/opinions. It just interests me to think about these things.

[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.]

R131 and R129 - That's precisely her secret: it's why she's relatable - she isn't remarkable (nor are William or Harry or Charles), only the circumstances of her birth are. It's why she can sit down in an English cottage and have a cuppa with a housewife in Devon and look like she belongs there. It's pure genius: a woman with a personal fortune worth allegedly close to $1.0bn, one of the best private art collections in the world, a fleet of armoured Rolls-Royces, racehorses, and an extensive portfolio of real estate including 40,000 acres of some of the richest game and woodland in Scotland, a jewellery collection that beggars the imagination . . . and she's quite ordinary. Why would she be expected to be anything else? Certainly she's had to develop some extra-ordinary skills: understanding the political workings of government, developing a relationship with one PM after another, welcoming people she might otherwise have avoided (cough cough), and putting strangers at east. But she's profoundly ordinary and how she's carried this off is probably a lost art.

That's so true R132, and I never realised it until now - that is the reason why I also can't formulate an opinion on Kate, she is also like a blank canvas. It is a rare skill, she must be constantly deflecting to the person they are with and reflecting them back at themselves I think, which, if you can do it well, would make the people you meet love you.

The Americans on here is so funny. The Swindon car factory closing had nothing to do with Brexit, nor will Brexit be 'brutal' on Britain or even make any difference to the average person's life.

Kate and William were off on long vacations all over the world in 2011, the summer of the London riots. These vacations cost the tax payer a hell of a lot more money than Meg's one day shower, where the guests bought the presents, not the Brits. The Harkles haven't had a single vacation abroad since they married.

Where did Harry and Meghan go on their honeymoon? It certainly is a well-kept secret. In fact, unbeknownst to us, they may have had multiple vacations abroad using private jets and friend's residences.

R135, don't dare to mention the costly holidays the Cambridges took in 2011 and all the following years, with a team of security all being paid for by the public. That is fine because 'they have to go on holiday somewhere'. But God forbid American Meghan have an American baby shower and invite a few celebs alongside her close friends. She only needed security for a weekend, the Cambridges take it with them for weeks of foreign vacation at a time, several times a year.

R136, they didn't go anywhere, unlike the Cambridges who not only had an expensive honeymoon, they also vacation regularly in the Seychelles and Mustique.

Kate looks beautiful in her recycled coat and with an updo. Personally, I think it’s time for her to cut the hair to a shoulder length that’s still long enough to put into pretty updos. Something more grown-up and commanding than dangling tendrils and girlish mermaid waves.

Bea and Eug must fight the matronly frump nonstop. They’ll probably succumb to it soon with a sigh of relief. But I’m not being nasty; I like them a lot.

R137, what close friends? Coworkers from her most recent legit gig? Fellow Sunshine Sachs clients? Her mother?

Kate also travels on private jets to stay in private villas, but we still find out about it: She travels to the Caribbean frequently without William. Imagine if Meghan did that, holidayed regularly in the Caribbean without Harry? You would all say the marriage was over.

'At six months old, Britain's Prince George is already a world traveller.

Kate Middleton has jetted to the Caribbean for a holiday with her infant son and family, Prince George, according to Us Weekly.

The royal couple are joined in Mustique by the Duchess' sister Pippa Middleton and boyfriend Nico Jackson, as well as her brother James and parents Carole and Michael.

The Middletons holidayed at the same exclusive villa last year with Prince William, who was unable to make it this time around.

William is staying back in the UK to continue with his Cambridge studies," an insider told the magazine.

The high profile family are expected to return by the end of next week.'

R140, you have no idea of who her close friends are, just like she has no idea who your close friends are. You seem to have that millennial mentality that if you don't see if playing out on social media, it's not happening.

Meghan had tan lines at last year's Trouping. I doubt she got them sunbathing on a beach in Devon.

Of course they're able to and have travelled to luxurious places without the public knowing. If they're smart, that's what they'll keep doing.

Apologies if this doesn't conform to the topic at hand, but I thought this slideshow was interesting. I'm not a devoted Royal watcher, but I find the pomp interesting.

'Kate looks beautiful in her recycled coat and with an updo. Personally, I think it’s time for her to cut the hair to a shoulder length that’s still long enough to put into pretty updos. Something more grown-up and commanding than dangling tendrils and girlish mermaid waves.'

Not going to happen. Her thick, long hair is enviable and she won't chop it to shoulder length. Many celebs her age have to use extensions to get that kind of look. She's still in her 30s, not in her 50s.

R144, George looks sick of the whole thing, as he often does on engagements. Louis has more of an eager, fighter look about him.

What would happen if George is gay, as a matter of interest? Could he still be king?

'Meghan had tan lines at last year's Trouping. I doubt she got them sunbathing on a beach in Devon'

The weather was in the 80s and 90s in May and June here in the UK. Surprised you've forgotten that, but then, you're not English, are you?

It's poignant to watch the various faces come and go. The only constant is the Queen.

The UK taxpayers aren't paying for Kate's and William's holidays except for security - the same security the Queen, Harry, Meghan, etc. get. You act as if these rich people don't behave as rich people do. That wasn't the point: the point is, they don't flaunt it. Kate's parents foot the bill for those vacations in the Caribbean, not the UK taxpayer. No one suggested that William and Kate weren't the fortunate of the earth, either - but they're smart enough not to rub the taxpayers' noses in it. They slip away quietly once in awhile and the villas they stay at are friends' villas, not ones purchased for them by the Sovereign Grant.

Both Frogmore Cottage and Kensington Palace were renovated on the backs of the UK taxpayer, and at very much the same cost. The difference was that at least KP is a historic building that is what I believe Americans call "vested in the state". We call it part of the Crown Estates. FC, on the other hand, was a dumpy little place that no one, ever, anywhere, would bother to pay to visit and has no historical relevance whatsoever. The idea that the taxpayer should have paid more than £3 million to renovate it for the sixth in line and his divorcee wife was absurd. Charles and the Queen should have split the cost. They could make an argument of sorts (not that I'd buy it) for renovating Kensington Palace for the next Prince of Wales but not for the sixth in line at Frogmore Cottage.

This just in: the royals and rich and love being rich and live as rich people do.

That isn't really the news, though. You didn't notice Kate and William sunning themselves in Mustique last winter whilst the Swindon labourers at the Honda plant got the bad news.

It's all about how and when. Meghan and Harry really don't get how and when.

R146 - He wouldn't be the first gay Sovereign. The real question is the succession, which has to carried forward by "heirs of the body". Unless quite a bit more change occurs, George would likely have to keep it on the down low, marry an understanding woman content to swap a hetero relationship (temporarily) for wealth, status, and future Queenship, and give George the necessary heirs. Once they have offspring, George and the Future Mrs Queen can live comfortable, separate lives, very, very discreetly fucking whomever they please.

It's silly to believe Harry and Meghan didn't honeymoon abroad somewhere, R147. Just because it wasn't posted on IG doesn't mean it didn't happen.

We're supposed to believe the press about anything they say about meghan yet they can't name where and when they went on their honeymoon, name of their dog, or their schedule.

They had no idea about the cook book. Or where she gave birth until they told them. There were a bunch of speculation about home birth but nothing confirmed and I'm supposed to believe harry and meg tell the press anything? lol they haven't got a clue. They don't even know where they're staying while frogcott is undergoing renovation.

R150, Isn't there an order of succession if a king dies without heirs?

R153 - Yes, of course there is, but why would George want to turn to that? Just because he came up gay doesn't mean he wouldn't have the same longings for family, never mind seeing his own child follow him. And, even if he did prefer to pass the throne onto Charlotte, having it obvious at the outset of his reign that his Heir will be his younger sister or brother will weaken his reign, I think.

And for those who didn't Kings and Queens of England, the acknowledge gay/bi Sovereigns of note were Richard II and James I and VI (he is James I in Britain and James VI in Scotland).

^*didn't go through Kings and Queens of England . . ."

R155

[quote]Just because it wasn't posted on IG doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Wait - what?

@R118 very well said, DOC is there to warm not stun her styles mainly stand the test of time.

George seems very comfortable in his personality kudos to his parents for that.

Yes MM proudly? presented tanlines at TTC 2018 in her strapless Lola the showgirl getup too stupid to wear waterproof/smudge proof body makeup or not present shoulders on the balcony in the first fucking place?! one of the many reasons she's 86'ed from the balcony IF she appears we'll see well medicated Stepford wife RF is always 10 steps ahead. LordOverlord aka Geidt wasn't called from the pits of hell for nothing he's there to wrangle the Harkles. He would make a perfect Bond villain. He knows where her mouth has been watch how he air kisses her jaw, LOL!

Kate takes a security team everywhere she goes. The Brits pay for the air fares and the team's accommodation in the exotic locales.

I think many of you believe exaggerations of the Middleton's wealth. Google their home--William paid for at least a large part of it. The Middletons may be quite comfortable but they are not a part of the private jet circle. I think it's more likely that Kate and William pay for it.

R93: “Markle truly delivered an amazing year of drama.”

Yes she did, and this is why we love her. That’s what her rabid defenders don’t understand. Many of us don’t hate her at all, we consider her a marvelously amusing character and appreciate the drama she brings. She’s our plucky heroine!

R139 I want Kate to go full Jackie with her hair.

[quote] The honeymoon destination has changed a few times since they started planning, said Scobie.

[quote] The location won't be made public, but Scobie has heard some hints of the locations being discussed by Markle, Harry, and their security team from his sources.

'Yes MM proudly? presented tanlines at TTC 2018 in her strapless Lola the showgirl getup too stupid to wear waterproof/smudge proof body makeup or not present shoulders on the balcony in the first fucking place?!'

The Trooping last year was in the middle of a historical heatwave in the UK that had started in May. It broke all records, including the scorcher of 1976. A biracial woman who tans easily could have got tan lines just walking around the grounds of KP. Temps hovered in the 80s and even 90s for weeks on end.

Tan lines?? Off to the dungeon!!

I must say Kate looks very regal, like a Queen albeit in waiting.

'...or not present shoulders on the balcony in the first fucking place?!'

MARY!

Kate looked fabulous today.

R144 Wow, thank you for that slideshow - I'm so glad I clicked. There's something so poignant about scrolling through the years since the 30s and watching a family (the royal family, yes, but still just a family) grow up, have babies, grow old, disappear from the scene etc. 1961 and 1993 struck me in particular - 1961 for Elizabath looking absolutely imperious and queenly even as she holds her baby son in her arms and 1993 for the particular shade of screaming seafoam the royal ladies appear to have all chosen to wear.

6 year old me was actually at the Trooping in 1984, brought up to London by my grandmother who thought I would be interested. I was decidedly not interested and remember having to be prodded to stand up (I had long since decided to sit on the ground along the Mall because my legs were tired) so I could see the Queen when she rode by. What I most remember of the day was all the boring standing up and then my own utter disappointment that HM was not decked out in a fabulous sparkly 80s ballgown like my child-self had assumed queens wore at all times.

I recommend the slideshow to all royal watchers - amusing, fascinating (some of the fashions!) and also touching. Makes me think all families should get together once a year and take a photograph of them all together like that.

If Meghan appears at the Trooping, she will be in all the headlines. Louis will not get a look in.

*Elizabeth, not Elizabath. Oh dear, self.

The Welp Troll just wrote this about Harry Styles. She's a disgusting person who thinks the closet is shameful.

'Dude is an odious closet case alkie, but he is good at making money.'

@R164 thanks for letting me know I need to block you I've heard so many dysfunctional excuses to pardon her lack of royal protocol in the past year from loonies like you. She showed tan lines at TTC and you're excusing that due to her race saying she tans easily? Unkindly, I call you an idiot. Au Revoir.

R173, She's just upset that Omid Scobie confirmed that Harry and Meghan went on a two-week honeymoon. Troll Troll.

Markle and Dim are going on a honeymoon? WTF have they been doing the past year?

R173, every thread you say you've blocked me, going back for the last thirty, but you're still here, responding to my posts.

Sorry you were triggered by bare shoulders on your sacred balcony! I'm sure if sainted Kate had showed hers, you would be in rhapsodies about how elegant her shoulders were.

Meg and Harry didn't have an expensive, flashy honeymoon, or we would have known about it. As you say, she's a manically merching narcissist, so how could she resist showing off that she was in an exotic location with the Queen's grandson? Not like a narc to keep it low key, is it?

Love how easily upset some of you are.

R146 - A gay monarch would be very interesting. I suspect the other poster is right and he (let's assume George turns out gay) would just come to an arrangement with a suitable and understanding woman. One reason I believe he would go this way and not the openly marrying a man way, which would be perfectly legal, is another thing the other poster brought up - the "heirs of the body" rules, which were written long before modern medical tech made is possible to have a biological child without any sex happening. A biological child was recently ruled ineligible to inherit due to being born via surrogate for one of the other noble families in the UK, no? Until those "heirs of the body" rules are changed to explicitly state what it is that makes a child eligible (i.e. biological link to parent, born of the parent's body even if donor gametes were used etc. etc.) to inherit titles (etc.) I suspect hetero 'arrangements' will be the done thing with any gay monarchs.

R148 - That's my comment at R169, which I rushed to post (without reading other posts first because I didn't want to forget the years I planned to mention), and now that I read yours I see we said very similar things. The poignancy of seeing familiar faces disappear, pregnant bellies turn into toddlers, then teens, then adults, then old people. And the Queen herself, as you said, always there. I wonder how the UK populace will react when she dies? I remember being a teenager and finding the Diana rigamarole embarrassing (and also just not caring about it much), but I will be genuinely sad when HM goes. Will Britain explode in a weird paroxysm of unBritish emotion again? Somehow I think not, although that's not to say I don't think anyone will care. I think many of us will care more than we perhaps expect to.

Anyone who thinks William, Kate, Harry and Meghan aren't taking luxury vacations entirely out of the public, and that Hazbean didn't go on a honeymoon, is delusional. These motherfuckers are all rich as hell and unburdened by 9-5s. Of course they went on a damn honeymoon. Of course it was to somewhere normal people couldn't dream of being able to afford. Of course Will and Kate do the same.

I think they can easily change the 'heirs to the body' rule. As you say it was written a long time before the invention of surrogacy and the child will be just as much his biologically whether it is produced the traditional way or otherwise. Not actually that I'm a fan of surrogacy myself due to ethical issues but if this law were an impediment I'm sure they would change it.

They have changed the law on women inheriting the throne of they are first-born even if they have brothers, and on the heir being able to marry a catholic, in the last few years haven't they? and those were spirit of the law as well as letter of the law changes.

@R174, sigh. Block button, old chum. When @R164 disappeared so did other loony posts. MM being gauche is legendary. Tan lines, hah that's nothing. Dangling hem price tags, see-through thigh-high slit skirts her Basic Instinct posing is the stuff of satire looking forward to the drag shows and underground plays.

R179 - If I recall correctly it was Will and Kate's marriage (and assumed forthcoming children) that prompted the change to the inheritance rules (only for the royals, though, right? not other British nobility?) and then her first pregnancy that kicked it into high gear to be passed. I remember suspecting that they were having a boy when it seemed to calm down at one point in her pregnancy, although I can't remember specifics. There seemed to be an intense rush to change it and then, although it did get changed, less of a rush after a certain point.

Either way I think that you're right and the change will come, as others have, when prompted by circumstance. Although I do feel sorry for that random toff child who is now legally ineligible to inherit, even if something happens to his older sibling, sue to the surrogacy situation.

Just saw the latest Kate photos - stunning. I adore her new mature, queenly look.

'MM being gauche is legendary'

Kate being a hoe with her flying skirt in front of, amongst others, the military, is even more legendary, and went on for years and years. Why won't tarty Kate obey protocol and get weights sewn into the hem of her skirts? Meghan has done nothing as harlot like as this.

If you change too much of the tradition, then it lessens the value of an institution that exists purely because it is 'old and traditional stability'

Video of the many times Kate flashed her ass and her panties to the assembled dignitaries.

Challenge : find a similar video for Meghan during her time as Harry's wife.

If we're being honest, I'd rather see a few flashes of Kate's ass than an endless parade of Megantoinette's ambition.

R182 - That's a recycled Catherine Walker, by the way, it's not new.

How much does Harry get when Charles dies, assuming William gets more of course as the heir. Is there a prenup in place for Meghan? If she'd married a wealthy man here in the US you bet she'd be made to sign a prenup. Is that sort of thing done in the UK among that circle? Paul McCartney didn't have a prenup and that caused greedy Heather to ask for 125 million pounds in her petition, all for only 4 years of marriage. The judge didn't hold back in his assessment of Heather's greed. I wonder if that case made the British courts less unwilling to grant obvious gold diggers from pulling similar stunts. Meghan would be smart to stay in the marriage at least until Charles dies so that Harry would be wealthier hence be on the line for more divorce settlement payout.

R186, if Meghan had even one instance of ass flashing, the hypocrites here would be in a posting frenzy, frothing with hatred about what a whore she was. We would never hear the end of it, yet Kate's multiple infractions are ignored.

The sovereign isn't going to split the main assets to favour a spare. He'll be taken care for sure, but he isn't getting half of Charles $400mill

True R184, but also the funny thing about traditions is that they are also constantly changing, just usually very gradually, or with a significant time-lag, so we don't really notice it much.

I think it was the Queen's grandfather who was reluctant to speak to his subjects on the radio as he felt that it let too much light in and made him too accessible (if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me, but that is how I remember reading about it). The Queen herself apparently disliked the idea of going on television on Christmas day to give a message to the nation in person, but was persuaded that doing so would make her more accessible and was a part of modernising the monarchy in the late 1950s.

Now the Queen giving an address on television is the very stuff of tradition but then it was something very new. So part of being traditional is adapting on changing, but the speed at which this can be done while retaining the continuity that is inherent in the institution and which gives it meaning, is probably a very delicate balancing act.

As regarding the 'heirs of the body' law, I don't see that changing that will really affect the institution, especially if it were for a male monarch who would not be carrying the child anyway.

The MeMe Stan seems to think MM is somehow in competition with Kate. She's not. Kate outranks her. Even with her arse flashing Kate is still more regal and dignified than Meghan will ever be. In any case it's not like Kate was deliberately flashing,the wind blew up her skirt. She learned to weight them down.

Charles has most certainly taken care of both sons in his estate, they will each probably get another trust fund but set up so they cannot touch the capital. Remember Charles also has to take care of Camilla and may also leave each of his four grandchildren trusts. So Harry is unlikely to suddenly come into 200 million - he'll be better off than he is now, but my guess is his actual cash income will double to a very nice 600,000 p.a., but subject to standard Inland Revenue taxes. William will be much richer: he ill inherit the Duchy of Cornwall and its 20+ million annually. Charles as King will inherit the Duchy of Lancaster. He can, of course, continue with those revenues to supplement the incomes of lesser members of the family. My guess is that he will continue to supplement Harry's income, but not William's, as William becomes Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall.

So the Sussexes will be fine - just not quite as fine as the Cambridges.

He won’t leave his grandchildren anything, r193. They’ll be taken care of by William and Kate.

I don’t particularly care if super-wealthy people take private jets. I would, too, if I could. Flying commercial is garbage.

What irks is when they lecture the rest of us about our carbon footprint.

Kate's stylist has been out on maternity leave the last few months and the fill-in is nailing it.

Agree.

Meghan isn't a tiara kind of girl. LOL.

Meghan looks just like the Octomom in that photo r198 lol...

With all due respect R183, if your chosen battleground is going to be "who has been the bigger harlot/whore," I'll point you to the "sexy BBQ" video Meg did for a men's magazine, or one of her steamy sex scenes in Suits. And I'll do that as someone who a)doesnt like Meg and is neutral on Kate and b)doesn't like or dislike either of them due to "whorishness." Kate had a few thigh flashes (and a butt flash! I had never seen that photo before) early on, which she seems to have had under control for a few years now, but Meg has actual simulated cable show sex and finger-sucking/lip-biting/low rent Nigella Lawson video.

Am I the only one who sees a certain buttoned-up, British kind of sexiness to Kate Middleton? She comes across oh-so-proper, and that sly slit in her skirt (i.e. from a week or so ago, the navy polka dot dress) or momentary-peek-of-bare thigh moments from early in her marriage are... kind of sexy. It wouldn't be sexy on a Hollywood actress or a Kardashian but it is on Kate.

That's interesting R201, because (and I've never really thought of it before) but I don't find the Kardashians remotely sexy (bi woman here), but the accidental flash of Kate's bum was really quite sexy, because it was accidental. People like the Kardashians who put it all on show all the time have no idea what real sexiness is, there's nothing sexy about that kind of obviousness, to me.

R201 - No, you're not the only one.

Meghan couldn't pull that subtle sexiness off if her life depended on it. Her style is the Suitcase Girl Hyena in Heat look.

R200, what Meghan did prior to being in the royal family is irrelevant, just like Kate's yacht girl summer and uni fashion show where she paraded in a bikini and a mesh mini skirt are irrelevant.

Fact: Kate refused to conform to the royal protocol that one's hem must be weighted, preferring to shamelessly expose her arse and upper thighs at the whim of the wind. Meghan respectfully weights her skirts so as not to embarrass HM, Prince Harry and any attending officials.

Additional Trolls

I Miss the Dangling Tendrils Threads (where we were left to hate unchallenged) Troll

Kate's Ass Flashes are Sooo Sexy Troll

Kate’s face is looking fuller in those pictures. Maybe she can announce #4 at Archie’s christening

R206 It's probably because Kate has stopped nursing Louis and is gaining her weight back.

If they have four it will be another boy, as happened with the Queen.

R206 Why would you encourage Kate to have more children? Giving birth is hard work and very painful.

Women aren't baby machines.

That's not how reproduction works, R208. Some of you are clearly brain dead. It's laughable except some of you must interact with the public at some point, which is quite frightening.

Just as Kate refusing to put weights in her hems for years is excused and her flashing termed 'subtle sexiness'. I'd hate to see what you lot consider overt sexiness (let me save you jackals the keystrokes...suitcase...hamburgers...etc).

On the other hand, tan lines on Meghan means she's a narcissist that is singlehandedly bringing down the monarchy. She should have covered her shoulders or worn make-up to mask it but it's no where close to the future Queen Consort (if she ever makes) showing her flapjacks. On several occasions. Even after alleged complaints from the Queen. You can take the girl out of the coal mine but can't take the grasping chavette out of the girl. Thankfully, she's learning.

[quote] or momentary-peek-of-bare thigh moments from early in her marriage

Kate's had problems with her hems as recently as 2016 in India and 2018 at Eugenie's wedding.

R183 You're confounding the word 'hoe', it is not used to describe wardrobe malfunctions. It mainly applies to thirsty women who keep pivoting their way to next level status; can be sexual but not always the case. I'd argue Meghan is a hoe by virtue of her established history of ghosting people among other actions in order to get to where she's at right now. Trick is staying at that next level though, and Meghan doesn't seem to know how to play that game.

No one is going to give a rat's ass in a few years when she's in her 40s, celeb influencers in her age group are a dime a dozen and there's nothing unique about what she's selling. A bit old to be in the social influencer game, and without her marriage she's basically an American Fergie. She may talk up her persona as a stylish humanitarian-feminist but her SM posts show her to be Basic Becky at best, there's nothing special or unique about her until she got together with Harry. FFS she's Oprah-certified, you can't get more basic frau than that. She isn't going to be the next Gwyneth, she's not even a visionary in dumbassery in that regard unlike Gwyneth. Say what you will about Gwyneth as an influencer, at least she comes across as genuine in her batshit crazy wellness schemes. Same things goes for the Kardashians, they're genuine too in their vapidity. Kardashian sisters don't pretend to be what they're not, they don't pretend to be anything other than hairy Armenian girls with average-good looks who transformed themselves into aspirational symbols of shallow LA lifestyle. Even when the Kardashians photoshop their waistlines or asses, they still come off as genuine. I have to hand it to them it's not an easy thing to do but they pull it off more often than not.

Meghan's problem is that she does not come across as genuine, far from it. She embellishes and misrepresents herself to the public because I suspect she feels insecure about herself. Paints a glorious picture of dad then didn't even allow Harry to meet him before ghosting him for good. Sends wedding ring via mail back to ex-husband. These are not things that a nice or a normal person does and they're just two examples. Even the so-called humanitarian efforts are tinged with secondary intentions. The way she can't help but interject herself in IG posts that have nothing to do with her or at the most where she's a periphery figure, the self-importance is so evident it's hilarious in its transparency.

^^^meant to say hoe can mean many things but flashing/ wardrobe malfunction is the least of the meanings, while social climbing hoe is more apropos in this context when applied to Meghan.

[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.]

[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.]

'No one is going to give a rat's ass in a few years when she's in her 40s, celeb influencers in her age group are a dime a dozen and there's nothing unique about what she's selling...'

Oh, dear, here you are again, writing the next chapter of your novel. MM has no desire, or need, to earn her living as an influencer. She is a princess of the United Kingdom, married to the son of the man who will soon be Charles III. Why on earth would she swap her life of privilege, prestige and luxury as a member of the BRF for an influencer's position?

Please show some common sense.

'Paints a glorious picture of dad then didn't even allow Harry to meet him before ghosting him for good ...'

The same man who sold interviews about her to the Sun and Mail? He's been ghosted for just over a year and you have no idea if that will be permanent. What did the avaricious fool expect when he slagged her off to a Sun reporter?

Why, R216? Because she envisaged a better life than living in dismal Frogmore Cottage, being excluded from prestigious events, and being shunted to the back row whenever the Cambridges or Waleses were around. Not to mention the other drawbacks of her current situation - being married to a barely literate balding ginger dullard whose chief pleasures are hunting and polo, and the unremitting scrutiny and condemnation of the British public.

R218, she hasn't been excluded from any 'prestigious events', though, has she? And Frogmore will have been very much their choice. In the US, people's idea of luxury is a big house in the country, and now she has it. She spent a year living in the two bedroom Notts Cottage, so this is a huge upgrade. She's had it renovated and refurbished exactly to her personal taste. They also have rooms at BP.

If you really think that Frogmore will upset her so much that she'll leave Harry and the baby for a life flogging brands on IG, I don't know what to tell you. You're reaching so hard you're going to need Vicodin for your sprained shoulder.

A renovated staff house an hour from London in a dull market town, with planes flying overhead 24/7, when you were counting on getting a 20 room apartment in KP? I assure you, Windsor is not the Cotswolds. Rooms at BP would be a suite, nothing more. And as for being excluded...Remembrance Day, the garden party and the Investiture ceremony spring to mind. And life with Harry.....? And being nitpicked for every personal wardrobe choice and not being able to speak up to voice the things she is allegedly most passionate about, or defend herself against numerous critics? And what about meeting the great unwashed public at care homes and hospitals?

I think she was better off in every way before she hooked up with Harry.

R220, you are the one who always says her life before him was a desperate grifting nightmare but now you've changed your tune!

KP is in central London where the air quality is poor, and they were cheek by jowl with the Cambridges. Far better to be out in the countryside in their own large house. There are planes going over Kensington from Heathrow as well - Kensington is actually much closer to Heathrow.

No, Windsor is not the Cotswolds. It's much closer to London. The Cotswolds really would be seen as exile with its crappy road and rail links. You are clearly not from here.

MM did go to the Investiture and to multiple tedious garden parties. You seem to think all the royals relish these engagements when in reality they probably find them dreary and are not keeping a score card as to who goes where.

Windsor is closer to Heathrow than KP, but Kensington suffers from traffic noise as it's surrounded by main roads and will also have planes flying over, as does all of central London. They can most likely triple glaze to block out the noise.

R220 and R221, please take it somewhere else. Sick of R221's manic defence of MM and pontifications on Windsor's distance to Heathrow and equally sick of R220's mercher/npd/frogwhore allegations. You both sound pathetic and R221 you sound like a PR lackey who has nothing better to do but slut-shame Kate because "he did it first!!!". Can we have the tiara people back please???

Hilarious that R220 thinks planes will be the tipping point for MM giving up her royal husband, child and residence. The girl was brought up in pestilent LA for God's sake. The air quality in Windsor is much better than in traffic congested Kensington.

They will be very happy there.

Fuck off, thread policeman at R223. The tiaras are ugly as hell.

'And being nitpicked for every personal wardrobe choice and not being able to speak up to voice the things she is allegedly most passionate about, or defend herself against numerous critics? '

She doesn't care about this. Kate gets the same treatment, so do the York girls. She can support her passions via charity work.

220= MM's former agent, Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne

I think you have confused me with another poster, R221. I guess we'll have to see whether MM sticks around or if she bails.

R226, she was quoted as saying how she hates not being able to defend herself against her critics.

LA might have poor air quality, but it's better than it was and in any case, you can sit outside in the garden without planes flying over you all the time.

Re the tiaras - any diamond tiara made before 1930 or thereabouts is of no esthetic appeal (to me) because diamond cutting was so primitive.

The point I was trying to make is that I don't think current MM's life is that great for all the reasons I enumerated. I certainly don't think she deserves better; she has earned her downgraded status (they were definitely supposed to get the big KP apartment) and the criticisms directed at her, by her own behaviour. I also think she didn't understand the parameters of the job she signed up for and that they are not changeable. I do think she will bail and in a few years, Harry will remarry - someone less likely to rock the royal boat.

Kate looking polished and professional yesterday:

At the very least Markle would do well to get some intensive therapy during her little down time to address some of her self-hating issues, but that's never gonna happen. I predict all of her narc tendencies and behaviors will intensify x10 as she gets increasingly isolated and more and more inside her own head.

R214 There were lots of posts of the Beating Retreat last night, upthread :-)

MM, well, she said that she would bring "star power" to the RF, and I really believe she actually thinks that they should be grateful for that. Hence the face like a slapped arse when she is seated, or standing, in position according to line. Do you think that she believes that she should be at the front to "help them out" ? Maybe that goes through her head.

She's certainly an interesting case study, for those who work in particular areas ( he says, treading carefully).

Yet R221 she was living in the Cotswolds wasn’t she . She and PH sued a tabloid for pics of their getaway .

Notably her name wasn't on the court docs R233. Just Harry's. And another party was sued, but was not named.

Regarding Harry and MM's honeymoon, my guess is they didn't take one because of her visa status. Meghan had to enter the UK on a fiance visa with the intent to marry within 6 months of receipt. You can't leave the country while on that visa. After you get married you need to apply to convert the fiance visa to a marriage visa. During the processing period you can't travel.

I know some British-American couples in the UK, and if they married in the UK they had to delay their honeymoon. If you get married in the US, it's much easier. There's no need for a special visa to get married there, so you can go on a honeymoon right away, then fly back to the US to apply for the marriage visa. But obviously Prince Harry wasn't going to have his wedding in the USA.

R221 I suggest you take out a map and look at the distance between Heathrow and Windsor vs Heathrow and Kensington Palace. Better still why don't you save up some money and actually get on a fucking plane and fly into Heathrow and see how close you actually get to Windsor Castle on the approach in. You can basically wave to the Queen from the plane. It is one of the busiest airports in the world unlike London City, there are over 600 flights a day into Heathrow, the noise in Windsor is deafening. It's so bad that they had to divert aircraft on MM and Harry's wedding day for 15 mins when MM arrived.

Also if you ever had ever been to London you would know that Kensington Palace is quiet, it's in a huge park and there is hardly any traffic noise.

Agreed. I have family in Windsor, and whenever I visit and we're out in the garden, it strikes me yet again just how awful and invasive the noise of the planes is. I used to live in W. Hampstead, which is also near a flight path, and the noise could be quite bad there - but Windsor is at a whole other level.

There's no noticeable plane noise near Kensington Place

Ah, her planted PR, R198. Same tactics our HS/spazz troll uses, cannot talk about Me-Gain without slagging off Catherine. What may appear to be faint praise of Catherine is a mean girl slam. Long AND short game to the Cambridges. None of this had to go this way, but it was her choice to build her brand as the foil. It is not working out well. Every time she is deprived of something she tries to spin it as she did not want it anyway. It is childish and transparent.

She really is quite a sad person, pitiable except for the chaos and harm she brings to the lives of others.

I can't help it but whenever Welp Troll or Spazz Troll are mentioned, I've got an instant earworm of Tom Jones' Sex Bomb. Just caught myself quietly singing " Spaz Troll, Spaz Troll, You're a Spazz Troll..." as I'm waiting for the washing cycle to finish.

The Spazz troll has been here for years, poking fun at him in song is a new twist. Tom Jones? That does tie in with the UK threads I suppose.

Who else is looking forward to the clothes this weekend and to little Louis?

I'm looking forward to tomorrow, who doesn't love the hats, the outfits and the antics of the little Royals? Should be great fun!

Remember when the haters were insisting that Louis had Downs Syndrome? And look how right they were!

You've got an ugly heart R243.

Photos of Sophie Wessex visiting a school this week.

Thank you, R244!

I do feel a bit sorry for Archie in all this. Anyone who has had a narc parent, never mind 2! knows how tough it is for kids. Hope a kind nanny can be an anchor. The Cambridge children are far luckier in that regard as well. Will Me-Gain allow him any contact with her family or his Windsor cousins? Seems quite a lonely life, the better to provide narc supply.

[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.]

Original Lord Snowden interview, here....

The Queen still has some power over a grown man like William.

Stand up, boy!

Swallow your coffee before reading, you have been warned.

Kate looks like she's has highlights in her hair. It softens her look.

Three royal ladies at the races.

A delusional Deplorable posted this. There is NO FUCKING WAY the Queen would say anything like this about THIS SHIT STAIN. EVER. PERIOD.

William at D Day events

R214 - Keep up, mate- it was posted nearly immediately.

To the poster upthread trying to assert that Kate had a "trouble with her hems" at Eugnie's wedding - it was a windy day, Kate kept her skirt down, no one saw anything but her legs. She managed beautifully.

Which is more than one can say about Meghan's "accidentally left open" top button on her blouse to the von Straubenzee wedding or the "too big" armholes that showed her black lace brassiere, or the see-through skirt on the tour Down Under, or the tag left hanging from a hem during same, or the Near Basic Instinct moment in late pregnancy that had absolutely nothing to do with paps with telephoto lenses invading a private home . . . there was nothing "accidental" about any of it of Meghann's "wardrome malfunctions" except possibly the now infamous tag left hanging from the bottom of that coral coloured dress she was wearing. And I'll wager that wasn't accidental, either, but the P.A. she was roundly abusing on that tour smilingly let her get off the plane with it. That would be Melissa Tabouti, whom the BRF praised later on for her experience and service, refusing to debunk the rumours of how appallingly badly Meghan behaved to her on that tour.

^*wardroBe . . ."

Is the “Kate is a ho” person for real? Or is she so invested in Meg that she’s trying to get at the Kate lovers?

R254 - Delusional is putting it kindly - mental illness is an excuse. There is none for outright lying. The Queen doesn't make statement like that anywhere where she can be heard, she doesn't make statements that can remotely be translated as political, and from public statements she has made, that isn't even her "voice".

R258 - No, and yes to both your questions.

If you block and look at his other posts, R258, it is pretty edifying.

R244 - I believe R243 was being ironic. There were claims that Louis looked like a Down's Syndrome child on an earlier thread, an absurd claim that the BRF, were it true, would have publicly announced, oralternatively Kate would have suffered a "miscarriage" after the mandatory for all pregnant women over 35 test for same. He clearly isn't an the poster's saucy tag line I believe was irony.

Lol R251. Reading through the Twitter thread, someone mentioned no pap walks of Doria recently....well, there are, I guess the price has to be right first.

These were uploaded on the 4th, so a few days ago. The thing to watch for is.....WHEN they will be actually used. When will they be saved for?

R251 - I wonder if that one is far enough over the line to bring the lawyers in and get her shut down, the way they did the notorious Skippy (twice, but she keeps returning)? Of course, she doesn't mention Meghan by name, but who is the Darren person she refers to?

And those are just a few of them, there are TONS of them.

The Darren doll is a silicone real life baby doll R263

R261 here. I have to stop assuming that everyone on these threads shares my dark sense of humor. I was being 100% sarcastic when I posted that about Louis having Downs. He turned out to be the most beautiful Cambridge baby, which is ironic considering that so many people thought he had Downs. It's astonishing that R244 didn't know I was joking.

R265 - Ah, thanks. Then she's just another tinhatter. She's probably Skippy's long-lost younger sister.

You know, it is just possibly genetic. . . .

Found this for you, R263.

It was a bit odd how Harry appeared to be pressing on the arm quite hard and that it was so imobile. Even sleepin babies move, make sounds, etc. They love to feed these theories to keep people talking, just like the nonsense over the birth certificate.

She is basically the queen of the tinhatters, R267. But it is hilarious. And they deliberately feed all of it to keep people talking for/against, etc.

R266 - Well, the poster might be forgiven - sometimes irony does get lost on sites like these. As that saying has it, "On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog."

I saw a New Yorker cartoon once, when mobile phones came out, of a man grinning as he walked down a street holding one up to his ear, saying, "This is great! Now nobody knows I'm crazy and just talking to myself!"

R268 - It is hilarious, as was the surrogacy theory, in my view. The only thing I truly did find suspicious was the size of Archie. Having held a newborn niece and more recently my great-niece in my arms (God, the passage of time is brutal!), they seemed half the size of that baby. My family runs small-boned so perhaps nothing in that, but for a two-day old Archie seemed more like a month old in Harry's arms. But then, I'm not a paediatric expert.

Lord Snowdon in that article at R248 is so full of shit. I doubt he lost a moment's sleep over selling his mother's wedding tiara. He sold her beloved home in Mustique less than a year after she gave it to him--which hurt her deeply. He sold his father's country cottage, a home his father had worked on for decades, the same way. He's a grasping, entitled, materialistic asshole who makes some seriously ugly furniture.

I think the most shocking thing about Archie's birth was, in the end, how normal it was: A geriatric pregnancy that ran a bit late, and ended up in a (probably) induced labor at a state-of-the-art hospital. If Meghan hadn't been trying to play this like the second coming of the Christ Child, none of the rumors would have gotten started. Lindo Wing, announce to press she's in labor, 10 minutes on the steps to give the press a picture, go home and enjoy privacy: Sensible Royals follow that script for a reason.

R272 - I rather agree with your views here. In fact, he seems to have inherited the worst characteristics of both his parents, both of whom were self-entitled rude twats. His lovely sister seems to have escaped - Lady Sarah Chatto is said to be one of the Queen's favourite younger relatives and easy to see why.

The Politmoor was bought for Margaret, it wasn't historical to the family, so perhaps that's not so significant. And the marriage was unhappy, and his wife, Serena, comes from a billionaire family, so didn't really need it. They don't move in the tiara set. But his wife's family has more money than he'd ever inherited, perhaps he wanted to make sure he had some of his own.

And the furniture is loathsome. Whenever I see it, I remember that line from "Jackie Brown" (one of my guilty pleasures) when Samuel Jackson somes into that house and looks around and says, "Baby, where you get all this? This is some repugnant shit!"

...Sensible Royals

I think we've located the problem, Cap'n...

The not so sensible ones like that drama and chaos drives clicks.

Except, is it really working anymore? People like this are exhausting. Most lose interest fairly quickly. The next thing comes along. They are close to past their sell by date.

Long game to the Cambs.

It's a particularly muggy but very rainy day, today. And I see it's forecast the same tomorrow.

Will we be seeing umbrellas in the horse drawn carriages? This is some serious feather wilting weather. It's getting worse as I type.

Sooo...what goes on, DLers? Do the hoods of the carriages come up? Umbrellas?

It's a shame, no-one likes a soggy busby.

[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.]

This is a great collection of clips and stories from over the years. If you are a fan of The Duke, enjoy.

#Prince Philip Moments

Yes, R274, I've never understood the market for Linley's furniture. It's far beyond the reach of even the upper-middle classes, and aristocratic sorts were generally born with all the furniture they'll ever need. Even if they weren't, the style of his furniture doesn't exactly say old money. The only ones I can imagine wanting, for instance, this 88,000 pound inlaid marble dining table would be a Russian or Saudi mogul. But it doesn't seem quite gilded enough for them.

Perhaps that's why his company keeps going bankrupt and he keeps having to take on outside partners: He makes furniture for nobody.

Fuck you R266. It's astonishing that you're such a graceless cunt.

Just had to pause that Prince Philip video at R279 to say Fuck! At 4:30 into the vid, you can see how low the planes are, and the noise. And god knows when that bit of the clip was filmed.

Carry on.

I may be a graceless cunt, R281, but at least I'm not fucking BRAIN DEAD like you, you incredibly.stupid.bitch.

.....

The Poltimore tiara might not have been historic, but it was a striking piece and very much associated with Princess Margaret. Sad that we might never see it again.

I liked the Cartier halo on Margaret. It's the perfect tiara for a young woman--Kate did well to choose it for her wedding. It was HM's first tiara, and 18th birthday gift, though she never wore it. When the time comes for Charlotte's first tiara, the Halo would be an excellent choice.

If you people don’t think Meghan is going to stick it out, just have a look at Fergie.

Does anyone know which tiara Margaret is wearing here? It's lovely.

Margaret in the Diamond Lozenge tiara, a little-known acquisition of Queen Mary's (of course) that hasn't been seen in half a century. Somebody ought to take it out and wear it: It looks like a lovely piece.

Queen May in the Diamond Lozenge tiara, which originally had a pearl topper.

The best picture I could find of the Diamond Lozenge. It looks better without the pearls.

R285 - Like many pieces of this kind, the Politmoor comes off its base and converts into a necklace, which is one reason for its size. I believe HM has a couple such in her collection.

The Instagram Sussex photo of Harry laughing with the Vets - has 300,000 + likes.

The Instagram photo of Kate at her Veterans ceremony has 600 +.

So this might be an example of what has the Royal Family pretty rattled.

R288 - Don't know it's name but I believe that is HM's turquoise and diamond tiara, even in black and white - I think it's part of a set, or parure as they say. The turquoise is likely high-quality Persian.

R293 - I doubt it has them rattled. Nothing matters but birth order and if there is one thing they know how to do, it is wait for time and tide to wash out the trash.

R293, I don't know about their being rattled, though. If an influencer gets likes, it means money for them directly or in future deals. If an actor or model gets a lot of likes/followers, it can translate into future jobs. But what would the point of amassing likes/followers be for the royals? Their IG is just there because it's one element of modern PR. Why should they be upset that Harry and M have lots of followers (many, if not most, of which are from overseas)?

Harry fucked up his image when he insulted the old generation in some muddled millennial hippy speech. No picture is going to erase that sppech, and the backlash he got.

lol

R298, did I detect some subtle shade? Costumes for a man in drag is inspired by MM’s “style”?

Just a tad R299, just a tad, lol

R266 It’s not astonishing. This thread is disappointingly earnest.

Kate got 300000 likes and its,from yesterday and PH 375000 likes and that is 2 days ago . So I think that s not bad for 1 day .

R302 - Yes, I'm sure the BRF is teddibly "rattled" by that extra 75,000.

Leaving aside that a lot of those likes will probably be from America and therefore irrelevant from the royals POV, surely the Harkles getting likes is a good thing for the royals if anything? the institution has existed in some form for over a thousand years, and members of the family retaining popularity will help it to survive. It won't change the institution at all but it just might make things a little easier if the current 6th in line to the throne and his family are liked by people.

They need to be liked by the people they represent, not americans.

I know R305 (if that was in response to me), I was saying that a lot of the likes will be from the US but not all, and if a portion of people here in Britain like them then that can only be good for the monarchy. Either way, no-one is rattled.

If Meg and Harry worked for a real firm, they would have been dismissed long ago. For serious ethical violations. For example, Their promotion of Meg’s friend’s yoga retreat in the Caribbean as a solution for mental-health problems. That is outrageous behavior, especially as it concers people’s health and well-being. And worse, it was directed at Americans.

Two kings will be installed at the Order of Garter this month: King Felipe of Spain and King Willem Alexander of the Netherlands. Two Knights/Dames must have died.

R307 - It was outrageous, and it was two fingers up to the BRF. Meghan is clearly from the "act first, apologise later" school. If the BRF spoke to the Harkles afterward, Meghan widened her eyes innocently and said, Who Knew? Or the BRF has given up the endless task of trying to keep her in the appropriate lane, knows by now that Meghan has nothing but contempt for them (like most users, she's charming to the faces of those she needs to use, but silently despises them for letting her get away with using them), and has a pretty good idea that America is where the Harkles are headed, and are just waiting it out. As someone interested in history, Charles at least is close enough to the WWII era (he was after all born in 1948) to remember that appeasement never works.

Thanks, R294. That's it: The Persian Turquoise Tiara, also known as the Triumph of Love Tiara. What a stunner. It's part of a parure including necklace, earrings, and a brooch.

From the Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor Blog:

[quote]It was made around 1900 by Garrard, and was given as a wedding gift to Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon in 1923 from her father-in-law, King George V. The tiara originally included an additional row of diamonds along the top, which was later removed. The bride did wear her gift, but it doesn't seem to have been a favorite. She eventually gave it to her daughter, Princess Margaret, as a 21st birthday present.

I can see why Margaret liked it so much. It's a lot like the Poltimore. Unlike the Poltimore, her children didn't sell it after her death. The parure that's either in the hands of Snowdon or Sarah Chatto.

Charlotte being a kid.

Photos of various royal ladies wearing the diamond necklace given to the Queen by Saudi King Faisal.

Video and photos of Lord Mountbatten's daughter Patricia at her wedding.

She looks like she's up to something. LOL.

Those are some serious eyebrows on Patricia.

A summary of the Queen's week. It's not over yet. Tomorrow is her official birthday, The Trooping The Colour

Kate was in good spirits last night.

Kate looked great too!

Various photos through the years of Trooping The Colour.

The Queen Mum (then Duchess of York) with her two daughters, Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret Rose of York.

Four portraits of the Queen - two by Romero Britto, one by Andy Warhol and another by Lucian Freud. Freud's portrait is horrid.

R310 - Ah, thanks for the detailed info on this beautiful piece. I'm not surprised Queen Elizabeth didn't wear it much, she was tiny and while she did wear some large tiaras, they tended to be of more delicate pattern. She was always trying for more height with her shoes and hats (I don't think she made it past 5'2"), but this was something that would have worn her. It wasn't her style. Her daughters were petite as well, although not as small as she was, but it's much better suited to Margaret.

[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.]

R305 - More to the point, they need to be liked by people whose good will and taxes they need to continue their scam of Saving the World whilst enjoying the perks partly underwritten by people they have no interest in saving - you know, like auto workers in Swindon?

Margaret was quite short herself, but she definitely had the hair and attitude to carry off big jewelry like the Poltimore and the Persian Turquoise.

Another picture of Margaret in the Persian Turquoise. Looks great in her dark hair.

More Trooping The Colour balcony shots to compare with those @R319.

There are strict rules on what NOT to wear at The Trooping The Colour. Denim is a big no no even for ticket holders. Does that mean that Duchess Yoko will show up in a denim outfit to give tradition and the Royal Family the finger? LOL.

Camilla gets a kiss from a war veteran. That looked awkward.

The eyes of Charles and Camilla.

She's probably a hot young this to that 90-something veteran, R329.

^thing

Strict rules that used to say 'no shoulders' and yet here we are.

That Persian Turquoise tiara is exquisite. I was never a jewel person at all, but now I’m quite interested...

I’m thinking a strapless black denim pantsuit for Meghan’s return to TTC.

With pull-down panels for breastfeeding.

Bit of a scandal about the auction of Princess Margaret's jewels in 2006 -- apparently some of the things that her kids were selling had been given to Margaret as a part of her official duties. Queen Elizabeth had to step in and make them donate the proceeds of those items to charity.

"According to senior royal sources, the Queen is determined to prevent embarrassing accusations that members of the Royal family have "cashed in" on gifts when they were given to the recipient as a representative of the state...Many of the valuables that will be auctioned include wedding presents given to Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon (then Antony Armstong-Jones) in 1960.

Most countries and individuals which gave the presents will be happy that the proceeds are going to charity. New Zealand, for example, gave the couple a pair of silver models of kiwis as a wedding present - now Lot 452 and expected to sell for £600 to £900. A spokesman for the New Zealand High Commission said: "We are pleased that the proceeds from our gift are going to a good cause."

R326 - It certainly is a stunning set, and in addition to Margaret's luxuriant dark hair, sets off her vibrant blue eyes. Margaret went to seed quickly - like Princess Grace, the kind of bloom she had wasn't served well by extra weight in the face. Both were stunning as young women but became very matronly very quickly. By the time Grace was in her early forties, in a pair of slacks, a button-down shirt, and a headscarf, no one would have looked twice at her in the supermarket.

FWIW R326 - I think Grace still had one of the world's most beautiful faces, even when older.

Posters above were discussing the ability to look approachable yet regal, to stand out yet project onto your companion. That seems extremely complicated, and I found the conversation fascinating. I'd love to hear more.

PS - whoever fell asleep in their Pringles and dip during last month's wedding? You are my spirit animal.

Welp Troll, Welp Troll

You're a Welp Troll

And are you really paid to post?

All the royal ladies of Betty's generation hit the wall hard in their 40s and 50s, including Betty herself. Kate may be different. I can't see her figure changing much.

Kate with her George and Charlotte.

How much George has grown.

Kate and Camilla often ride in the carriage together.

I like this cartoon but I don't know if the Queen can kick that high?

Charlotte has grown too.

Diana had "IT". I don't know what "IT" is but she had in spades.

Two of Sophie's Trooping outfits - I like the right one but not the left.

Young Elizabeth all bundled up.

R338 - For sure the royal gig is a very delicately balanced one. They have to move with the times, yet project timelessness and inevitability. They have to seem human yet higher than. They have to be above yet one of the populace. They have to care, but carefully nonpolitically. Their privileges make them an object of fantasy identification, but also of resentment.

Hence my comment far above that Kate's job isn't to stun, but to warm.

There have been discussions on both sides of the Pond about why the non-privileged often vote against their economic interests, and the usual conclusion is that a large swath of the Great Unwashed privately identify with the Very Well Washed. For royalty, the trick is serve as a projection screen for that need but without feeding the resentment.

The closest this country ever came to abolishing the monarchy was in the wake of the Abdication which, mind you, occurred during a time of grim economics, less than ten years after the 1929 Crash that caused the Great Depression. "The thin-faced thirties" as diarist Chips Channon called them. And yet, it wasn't the economy but the Abdication that brought the monarchy to its lowest point. Most politicians would sell their grans for the monarchy's approval rating.

Goes to show you how peculiar people are.

People like to believe in and identify with something larger than themselves. It's yearning for a form of immortality, I think. The first Queen Elizabeth regnant figured out that trick early on and played it for all it was worth, replacing the Virgin Mary in her newly protestant subjects' minds. Amazing that it still works today, but it does. It IS a delicate illusion, though, and Elizabeth II has been as perfect a symbol as her predecessor Elizabeth I. I don't know if any of her descendants will do as well.

I understand that death duties are a burden, and that Princess Margaret probably had so much STUFF, but I did find the public auctioning off of her possessions a bit tacky. I bet it was then-Viscount Linley's idea.

If Lady Snowdon or Sarah Chatto aren't going to wear the Persian Turquoise, I hope they'll leave it to the Crown so that it can be worn or displayed. I'd hate for such an exquisite piece to end up auctioned off, broken up, or hidden in some private collector's vault somewhere.

R346, In my experience 'It' happens when someone projects a combination of vulnerability and incandescence. And you're right, Diana had it in spades.

The camera adored Diana. She wasn't a perfect beauty, but she lit up a lens like few before or after. Also, the pain and disappointment of her broken marriage lent her a tragic depth that she never would have achieved if she'd married some nice posh bloke and raised four children in a big house in the country.

R353 R354 - Agree completely. Diana was a one-off. Perfect beauty isn't always the key: in some cases, like Diana's, it's that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. She had a sort invisible radiance around her that the camera picked up, especially in the early days. And of course it wasn't just Diana's looks, but to the gestalt of the times - she had softness, youth, aristocratic birth, the whole English Rose thing going, the aura of the fairy tale clung about her like a halo. Which is ironic in hindsight, as the one person not bowled over by her, was the man she was marrying. We only found out later that she was already driving him mad with her insatiable demands for attention and reassurance.

Diana had charisma to a ridiculous degree. She was lightning in a bottle. At first I thought Markle might have it. I thought her quite beautiful, and the camera seemed to love her. Then she started being...well, herself. How quickly her lightning fizzled. Any charisma I thought she had has just been replaced by her desperate bids for attention and missteps. It's quite interesting.

Perfectly stated, R355 and R354.

Diana was a vulnerable 19-year-old when she became famous, and a global celebrity, mother-of-two, and discarded wife by the age of 23. She and Meghan might share certain narcissistic traits, but their personal histories are so different that Meghan will never have the same allure. Diana did some shady shit in her time, but she always kept that air of vulnerability--nobody EVER called her 'tungsten.'

I forget sometimes that Diana was so young when all of this happened. I am the same age as Prince William (well, four days younger!) so while she was alive she was always considerably older than me. But now her memory is frozen in time and at 36 I am the same age she was when she died. She was only 'Princess Diana' for 17 years in all.

But from my age now I can see that she was just a child really when she married at 19 and still what I would think of now as a kid (or not quite a proper adult) when she had her children and then divorced, all in a few short years. Of course people did tend to grow up quicker then, but still, I can't imagine going through all of that when I was that age, I definitely didn't feel like a 'grown up'. She did so much, and was so much, in such a short time.

R356 - I find Meghan only reasonably attractive. Diana glammed up as she went on, but she still always looked like herself. And part of why Meghan isn't Diana is that Meghan is always "managing" her image and Diana, especially in the early days, seemed unconscious of hers. Meghan is really Diana's polar opposite: never "off", always "on". Diana managed to seem "off" even when she was "on".

Those photos of Diana on the streets of London whilst the paps hounded her, the photo of Diana holding the kids in the nursery with the sun coming through her transparent skirt showing her (then much fuller) legs . . . it was pure gold because it always looked unmanaged. Meghan can't pull that off.

The unconscious bit is something the Queen Mother had. One of her portrait painters (it might have been Sargent but don't quote me) said that Queen Elizabeth was "the most unconscious sitter I ever had". No, not Sargent - too early, she may not even have been married yet - there's another almost half-unfinished portrait of her by another famous artist, but can't remember the name, maybe he said it.

Both women as they went on in their royal careers became much cannier about image and weren't nearly as insensible of the eyes of the world as they may once have been - but it never showed. It's a rare gift - both women had it.

Meghan's problem is that it always shows.

Philip de Laszlo, he did a beautiful portrait of the young Duchess of York, I wonder if he said it?

Being born the daughter of an Earl has to give you a sense of identity that few can match, especially when you are later elevated to Princess and, in the case of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, Queen of England. I don't know if any American, especially one who was raised with the racial and social complexities Meghan has dealt with, could match the sense of innate identity which the Queen Mum and Princess Diana shared.

Meghan, like many US-born celebrities, is pretty much a self-creation. (Yes yes, she apparently used other people to get the opportunities that have gotten her where she is, but she found the people, she made use of the people, she took every advantage of those opportunities.) As a self-creation, Meghan knows where every crack and every patch in her sense of self is--of COURSE she's terrifically self-conscious. The newly crafted identity of Duchess of Sussex does not sit easily upon her shoulders. Maybe it will in time. Maybe it won't.

Ah, I have found the quote - I was right the first time, it was Sargent:

"The American painter John Singer Sargent, who settled in London in 1886, was renowned for his dazzling paintings of society beauties, artists, writers and statesmen. Late in his life, when he had virtually given up painting portraits, he nonetheless produced a large number of charcoal portrait drawings. Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and the Duke of York both sat for Sargent shortly before their marriage, which took place in April 1923. Sargent is said to have described Lady Elizabeth as ‘the only completely unselfconscious sitter I have ever had’."

And there you have it.

It's a lovely portrait. If this is what she looked like as a young woman (and it's often been said photographs didn't do her justice), no wonder so many young men were in love with her, especially when you factor in her famous charm.

The Duke of York by Sargent.

The Philip De Laszlo portrait is also much more flattering than any photo I've ever seen of the Queen Mother.

You can really see the resemblance to Eugenie there.

Poor Bea.

R362 - Certainly a sense of social identity, I agree with you there. But it's no guarantee of a solid sense of "self" which is a bit different. Diana was so unmoored emotionally, which could not be said of Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. Being the daughter of an Earl didn't protect her from the abysmal family situation that left her at 18 or 19 still in the grip of young fantasies that I don't believe Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was vulnerable to. For one thing, the Bowes-Lyon family went through WWI, lost one son, and opened Glamis Castle to serve as a hospital for wounded soldiers, whom . I think the young Lady Elizabeth was a far sturdier, more realistic character than the young Lady Diana. Her social status wasn't a help in the wake of her parents's terrible divorce, which was a public scandal at the time, and in which her maternal grandmother went into the witness box and testified on behalf of her son-in-law in the custody battle.

R368 - Then you haven't looked hard enough. There are many portraits of her, both photographic and painted, including one of her as a child leaning back in a chair, showing exactly the winsome aspect, large blue eyes, and beautiful colouring that she was later famous for.

^^* who, I believe, the young Elizabeth, only in her mid-teens, helped to care for and entertain. (Don't know where that bit went.)

R368

Oh, I agree that Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was much more self-possessed than Diana. But Diana, for all her insecurities, always knew she was Lady Diana Spencer. She didn't have to be self-conscious about her background or her public identity in any way. She was exactly the kind of girl Charles was supposed to be marrying, even if he didn't want to marry her (which is where her toxic cognitive dissonance no doubt came in).

Meghan is not who anybody pictured marrying Harry. I'm sure she couldn't even quite picture it for a long time. She's approached the role of Duchess of Sussex like it's an acting role she lucked into, and that's where a lot of the problems are coming from. I know Diana had a lot of problems adjusting to being Princess of Wales, but nobody ever thought her unsuitable the way that Meghan has been considered unsuitable. Hence, Meghan's desperate self-consciousness.

I know I'm not explaining myself very well. I'm no Megstan--I'm just fascinated by the intersection of royalty and celebrity she represents.

[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.]

But in many others all I see are beetle brows and bulldog chin. We'll have to agree to disagree about the photos, R369.

R373 - We're not in that much disagreement - I'd be the first to agree that the young Elizabeth was no more a classic beauty than Diana was. They had that in common, too: the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. Today, Elizabeth would be plucking those brows, dieting, straightening the teeth, etc., and mourning her chunky ankles. But she suited the era she was born into, just as Diana did. "Dainty" was a word of high praise, beautiful complexions more admired than looking good in a bikini - no one was being papped at the beach in those days. So she was much admired in her youth: the fresh dewy look, the daintiness, the complexion, the huge blue eyes, the charm.

I read an excerpt from a letter from the redoubtable King George V, Bertie's father, after the Yorks' marriage: "The more I see and the more I know of your dear little wife, the more I like her. You are indeed a lucky man to have so charming and delightful a wife as Elizabeth to help you in your work."

After the engagement, when Elizabeth first visited with the King and Queen, Queen Mary wrote to a friend, "Elizabeth Lyon is staying with us now. So pretty and charming and well brought up . . ."

"dear little wife" "charming and delightful" "pretty, charming, well brought up:

That was the ticket then, and that's what Elizabeth had, just as, later on, Diana seemed to have what the moment wanted.

Nicely put, R374. I suppose that was my real point: Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon appeared to be one of those women who are much better looking in real life than in photos. The camera didn't seem to capture the prettiness and daintiness and charm the way that portraits could.

Many people have also said that, as well as Diana photographed, she was even better looking in person. Charisma for days.

R371 - Not at all, I think you explained it very well. Our only difference in that post is re Meghan never picturing marrying Harry. I think she had that in common with Diana: early dreams of marrying high. It just took longer to coalesce as her prospects expanded.

R375 - Also, early photography didn't capture the beautiful skin, especially in black and white. I think that was true of the Queen, too - she was always described as much prettier in person because of the gorgeous skin. I believe that was why Diana was more striking in person, as well. Of course, photography in the 1980s showed that much more than it would have in the 1920s, but still, in person it would have shown more. In addition, people who saw Diana in person for the first time were often surprised by her height - even knowing she was tall, in person the 5'10"+ had more impact. The Emanuels, when she first showed up at their door , said the same thing: "The first thing that struck us was her height, her blue eyes, and her beautiful complexion."

And certainly they'd seen enough photos of her by then.

R293, I would doubt that they are rattled, esp given how easy it is to manipulate those numbers.

On a Datalounge thread, a dead end world

Where Spaz Troll boy meets Welp Troll girl

On a DL Troll thread in a dead end world

The Spaz Troll boy fights Welp Troll girl

Welp Troll Girl.

You’re a wag, R379!

I call Rach not being on the balcony tomorrow. What say yee DL?

You can really see Diana's lovely complexion in this picture.

I saw Diana up close on a few occasions and her height and blue eyes were quite striking. She lined them with blue underneath which made the color pop.

Why would the Cambridges care if the Sussexes have a few thousand more likes on a post? Jesus, that is so high school mean girl to even think that way. And Diana was indeed so much more than her parts. Her large nose made her. Without it, she would have nee merely pretty. With the larger proboscis she had true presence. I'm glad she grew up in a time before it would have been "fixed" by 16.

In her biography of Diana, Tina Brown recalled having seen Diana in NYC in the summer of 1997, and said her skin was like a velveteen rabbit's even at that point.

Without her father's wonky nose and high cheekbones, Diana would have looked just like her mother, who was a pretty woman but not anywhere near Diana's off-kilter beauty.

Welp Troll is the one calling MM 'Rachel'. Rain is forecast tomorrow so they won't be uncomfortable in their long sleeves and uniforms.

Diana had her mother's eyes and coloring, and her father's height, nose, mouth, and bone structure. She somehow cherry picked all the best features of the two, a feat none of her siblings managed.

Genetics really are a crapshoot.

Even as children, there was only one beauty in the Spencer brood. Sarah was cute but no match for Diana, and

and Jane was, well, plain.

I must be the only person out there who never thought Diana was gorgeous. Pretty plus princess but not like wowza.

Diana got the delicate jawline and high cheekbones, the most desired facial feature of the 80s. Plus her large, sparkling blue eyes. Kate and Meghan have deep set eyes.

Sophie Turner would be good casting for Diana. She's got the height, the coloring, even the bone structure.

The Welp Troll is nonsensical. Why would the Spaz Troll be working for Sony on behalf of Harry Styles AND for Markel's PR agency? He also went on the Sam Heughan threads and argued so violently with the OP that he got one of them shut down. Does he work for Sam too?

In person she was very charismatic. To a degree that surprised me.

One of her biographies--not the Brown one--said she was very moody, glowing and charismatic one moment and completing shutting down the next, like someone had hit her off-switch. Did you notice any of that, R396?

Did the word salad speech re: D Day remind anyone else of the bananas?

I did not, R397, but these were brief public events and once on the street. In the public events she played to the camera and really turned on a magnetism.

I saw Diana in public once in London in the early 90s. I appeared on the front page of the Evening Standard that night (out of focus, in the background). I didn't meet her or interact with her but I remember noticing how tall she was, too. Very statuesque, the kind of tall you notice on a woman. Will and Haz are lucky they got the height from their mother's side.

I really don't get how anyone finds Markle attractive. She's got such a manly face, and that nose! Not to mention the messy hair and clothes. She has never had an ounce of charisma in that scrawny body.

R392 - I've never thought of Diana as beautiful, either. Not even pretty. But I've also never thought of her as ugly or average looking. She really had her own thing going on. The conversation above about backgrounds and personalities etc. of various royals is wonderful, more pls. I am the one who said I sometimes see something sexy in Kate and I've been thinking about what other royals have had sex appeal. Note also that I am not conflating 'sexy' with 'beautiful.' In pictures of her during her youth I find Margaret quite sexy, often with a knowing and haughty look in her eye. William and Harry were both good looking when young but I've only found William sexy very recently as he's started to take on the Alpha Dick persona. When he was younger I found him bashful and shy. He still strikes me as shy and/or introverted to some degree, but he's - well, he's taken on the Alpha Dickness lately and I like it. And whoever came up with the term here on DL!

Harry has never been sexy to me, he's too puppyish. He did go through a phase in his early-mid 20s where he was extremely handsome, though. Meghan is also not sexy, although I find her exceptionally pretty. Kate in her coatdresses and updos isn't sexy, but Kate with a little leg showing, or that gif of her rolling her eyes (during the NYC visit, I think? when someone was telling her what to do?) - sexy. Just those little hints of the person she actually is. There is real chemistry between her and Will, and I've seen the same in photos of HM and Phil from their younger days, too. Never saw it with Chuck and Di. This might make some people barf but I do believe I've seen flashes of it between Chuck and Cam.

She did try quite hard in that burger video, R401.

R401 are you Asian? You must know plenty of 5 ft 4 men with small, pretty faces.

Regarding the Queen Mother, it's interesting to hear the comment from the photographer (or was it painter??) about her. Even as an old woman she gave off that aura of complete ease in her own skin that I have often found to be the one thing I truly envy in certain posh people. I've associated it before with public school education but I don't think that would apply to women of her time? It's something in the posh people water, though. Something they're raised with. Meghan doesn't have it at all. Neither do I. It's one reason I was primed to sympathize with her at the beginning, although that went away quickly.

R398 - Ha ha, yes! That specific part in your link is what stood out to me, too. "Don't underestimate the joy you bring to everyone you meet"? That sounds like something you'd say to a group of schoolchildren or nurses or something. But D-Day vets? Wat? I don't enjoy that gushy, finessed social media language even when it's used in contexts that could be seen as fitting. It was just a total head scratcher reading it in the context of a speech commemorating war heroes. That kind of thing makes me wonder if Meg is actually kind of dim, like her husband.

There seems to be no sense whatsoever as to how others will perceive things, I agree, R405.

You hoes are slow tonight! The Mirror says MM will attend Trooping The Colour today.

Has anyone seen Kate in person, up close? Or any other of the royal family? You’d think with all those walkabouts there would be somebody on here who has gotten a good gander.

[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.]

Lovely to wake up to find that the thread has taken an interesting turn (R362, for example).

R401, beauty is subjective, but usually one can tell if a person can be considered attractive or not. Meghan has nice eyes and a well-balanced, symmetrical face. The nose isn't pretty, but it doesn't distract. Her strong jaw line was presumablely dealt with via fillers (or clever makeup). Her "messy" hair is a style choice--perfectly coiffed hair can be aging; more casual, slightly mussed up hair is seen to be young and sexy.

Question for the women here re Kate's height. Upthread, someone said Kate used her height enhanced with a towering hat and high heels to overshadow MM and put her in her place at last year's TTC. I think that's true and I think she succeeded. Someone said on the DT threads that MM looked like the maid standing in the background, and I think that's also true.

But being tall has its' downside for women. Kate is lean, but she is not model slim. Her build is athletic, with broad shoulders and manly hands. Tall women with this build often feel awkward and ungainly when they tower over others. Only model types, with small bones and narrow shoulders retain their femininity despite their height.

Diana often looks hunched over in photos, a trait shared by many tall people. Kate's posture is always upright. My question - do you think Kate ever feels self-conscious and unfeminine when she is the tallest person in the room?

R412, Kate's TTC look last year--the 40s silhouette, the color, the tall hat--was the absolute best I've ever seen on her, and I loved that she was unabashedly making her tall self taller. I don't think she has a problem with her height--her husband is tall, and she's athletic and outdoorsy. I do think the choice to go so tall last year was conscious, and I love it! I'm hoping for more of the same today.

To be fair, Meghan did not look like "a maid standing in the background." I thought she looked very pretty and don't care about the politics of bare shoulders. She just looked like what she is--married to a less important person than Kate.

The Mirror and other outlets are saying Meghan will definitely be at TTC. Rain in London forecast on and off all day.

Predictions:

If she is skinny again, the Welp Troll and other Megxiteers here will double down on their theory that she was faking the pregnancy with a moonbump because 'nobody loses all that pregnancy weight so quickly'.

If she is still plump, the same people will claim that she has permanently lost her figure and will 'always be fat now.'

It would be hilarious if MM wore a sky high hat. Even in a beanie, Kate would tower over her.

I think the ideal height for a woman is 5ft 6-8. Kate is too tall and Meghan too short.

Kate is definitely model slim. MM has dressed inappropriately for the occasion too many times to list here.

It's high tension!

When I used the word hoe I was reprimanded that the correct term is ho . Allright i’m not English nor American .But I see hoe is used here all the time and nobody is correcting them . Just saying .

Meghan is a basic bitch. I wonder if her eyes are pretty under all that excess makeup? She had beady eyes as a child. The jawline still shows, quite significantly in some photos. The outing with the Queen comes to mind, when she is doing that strange thing she does with her mouth. I've seen too many hideous pictures of her to ever consider her attractive. Messy hair might be sexy on a young Bridgette Bardot type, but it isn't at all sexy on an ageing, greying divorcee.

[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.]

[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.]

Welp, Meg is at TTC. Pic of her in a car is Sun headline. Navy hat. Kate in primrose yellow.

Kate's neck is crepy in R420 and she looks stiff and unhappy, unlike smiling Meghan.

Why do most people act like Meghan is ancient? 37-38 is not considered old in this day and age, Sophie Wessex was older when she had her 2 kids. I dislike Megs immensely but that doesn't mean she's old.

'When I used the word hoe I was reprimanded that the correct term is ho . '

That spelling has been obsolete for some time. Keep up.

Kate looks like she's spitting nails. Nice hat, though.

Kate's been wearing tall hats for quite a while, not just at last years TTC. I think they look wonderful on her. Almost like a signature look, now, with the hair-up ( the hair-ups remind me of young Princess Anne's "dos" and I love them). And heels....god, she's been wearing heels forever. I could never stand those nude mini platform L.K. Bennett courts, I much prefer the classic pointed stiletto pumps.

Kate has a pursed mouth and is frowning. Probably argued with William. Papers are all leading with Meghan, not bulldog pup Louis.

Any thoughts on the " leaked " wedding pictures? Coincidence, or what? Strong Write on Twitter led the way, there....nudge, nudge.

I'd be frowning if I had to play nice with the little rat who was out to destroy my family, too R428

I love those hats of Kate's and they are definitely better than those silly saucers perched on the side of the head. But I love Camilla's hats most of all :-)

Queenie looks great in golf to match her carriage.

[R426], maybe because she is stuck opposite MM .

*gold

The DM's headline is "MEGHAN IS BACK!" as if to say, "Thank bloody GOD. Now we have something to write about."

R424, I think it's in the context of her motherhood (as of a certain age it's deemed a geriatric pregnancy) and of her ingenue behaviour--hanging on to Harry like a teenager in puppy love rather than acting like the late 30s divorcee she is.

[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.]

[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.]

She looks exactly like Doria in that pic

Meg looks tired and still quite poofy. Just like any new mum, I suppose.

OMG, she looks like SHIT!!

I miss the Queen doing this on horseback in uniform. That is my main mental image of her.

She still looks like a beached whale

MM looks bad, despite the perma-smirk on her face. Awful hat and outfit. Sad for Kate, she was photographed at the exact moment she was scowling. MM is way more skilled at concealing her emotions in public. But Kate better think about some judiciously applied Juvederm before her lips disappear entirely.

She still has a full face and big boobs but looks fresh and happy.

Meg looks fine (and yes, very much like her mother). Baby weight takes a while to go away and I'm not here for the recent celeb bullshit of showing off how fast they got their figure back (which means maniacal diet and exercise, which a nursing mother shouldn't be doing anyway).

Harry’s got a puss on.

She couldn't have found an uglier dress and hat if she shopped forever.

Fresh? It looks like she's got theatrical panstick on. Far too heavy make-up.

Her b cup boobs look as if they've ballooned to an F cup.

Dark colors again. I suppose because slimming.

The Queen looks wonderful.

Both Kate and Meghan have little, sunken eyes. I prefer Eugenie and Diana's big flashing orbs.

I'm a bit underwhelmed with the outfits so far, maybe because we've not seen them top to toe. Or maybe it's because I'm a little hungover.

I've had breakfast, so maybe a hairy dog for the Queen's birthday will liven the show up for me.

Go for it, R455. For Queen and country!

[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.]

[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.]

Boy, she does look like Doria in R457.

I honestly can't believe how bad that outfit is...the sleeve, hat and hair. Kate must be ecstatic.

r457 She looks like she's pregnant. More so now that the baby has been born than her entire preganancy. How odd.

Every now and then I wonder, what the HELL must Trevor think when he sees all this? It must be so surreal for him. If I could sit anyone down to spill all beans, it would be him. He knows Meghan better than anyone.

Gosh, those boys in the busbys look so young! A sure sign I'm getting older, lol!

MM is still huge, she must have been enormous in the last month of pregnancy, she really is bigger than the average 1st time mother.

Why can't she wear something bright and British especially on this day!

This one is ripe for captioning.

As is this one.

R461, wasn't she out of the public eye for the last several weeks of her pregnancy? I don't think we saw her at her hugest.

Everyone, woman gain weight when they're pregnant, some more than others, and they don't lose it all when the baby comes out. She's a short woman--she's not going to be back to her old figure for some time.

Camilla and Kate are at the window watching together.

The press on both sides of the pond is leading with Meghan.

Disgusted , but I expected it R469

[R469], same here. I shall avoid any newspapers and just watch it on telly. At least the BBC know what it is about.

Let's see if the rumours about children are true, that will knock MM off the headlines in the UK at least.

Daddy taught me all the camera tricks....

POCs love that Meghan has stormed the last bastion of white privilege! She looks more black now she's plumped up. Latinos and Afro Americans are beaming, calling her 'lil mama.'

Kate looks a bit fuller of face, too, in a good way.

ff the race baiting troll

I wonder if the third in line, little Prince Fugeorge, will be there. Maybe Raptor Baby Louis will be squawking in Egghead's arms, and we'll catch a glimpse of jowly Charlotte.

R477 That’s very mean but I did laugh.

Lil' Psycho Mama is a good rap name for Megasaurus.

It won't matter, R477. The grossly fat, unattractive Dutchezz is what people wanna see today, not gorgeous Kate or her gorgeous children.

Louis Fitzwindsor is said to make his first appearance on the balcony today.

R487, Anne is hideous! That huge hooked nose and quadruple chin!

This ceremony should be retitled Trooping the FUG.

That choice of hat just makes MM's face look even fatter.

I'd never seen a thin person with jowls before until kate. It's bizarre.

R486, Kate's face does look as if it's collapsing into her neck a little bit. I think she is unhappy in her marriage to bald William.

It’s pretty bad when someone wears a row of pretzels down her arm and your first thought is, “hmm, not the worst I’ve seen her look.”

I doubt they will trust Louis on the balcony. His face is so avid and strange. He looks as if he's about to pounce at any moment.

Horrible black frogging on Bea's sleeve and yet another flying saucer hat from Fugenie.

On the other hand, this [italic]is[/italic] the worst I’ve ever seen Charles look.

It must be so disappointing for the Megastans to see their idol still the size of a house, looking so fat and frumpy. All they can say is she looks glowing and happy. Yes she has loads of Dior highlighter on and she is fat. Fat equates with being happy apparently.

Where are the hacked wedding photos? DLer of the day sash to the bitch who posts links

Twas this, R493

Bungalow Meg.

I wonder if Harry is patient and understanding, or if he is wondering what happened to his Hollywood sexpot?

R492, she's still not as fat as Bea, Fergie, Fugenie, Camilla or the Queen, though!

Charles looks on the verge of cardiac arrest.

Here you go, r493.

That leaked pic is more proof that Harry is besotted with Meghan. Sad that grim faced Kate is trapped in a loveless marriage with the Egghead.

I doubt Meghan would enjoy being fat long term, but like it or hate it, being called fat isn't an insult for black and Latina women the way it is for white women.

Meghan just gave birth ffs but sure, have at it and call her a fatty fat cunt fat fatty

Charles is falling apart. Markle must be furiously working him so she and Harry will get a huge inheritance, so they don't have to go cap in hand to William.

God, she must have been absolutely massive in the last month of her pregnancy! No wonder she hid away from sight.

She looks terrible. That hat! That dress!

Double chin. Didn't get that from green juices, did you, love.

That dress is Givenchy. Looks more like Evans Outsize.

Give her six months and she'll be back to normal, unlike William, who has a year round fat neck and double chin.

[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.]

The leaked photo is interesting. He married her, she married fame. She is staring at the camera and her fanbase wth a stalker-ish intensity.

R506 looks like Per Una by Marks and Sparks.

Wtf has Fugward got on his hat? It looks like roadkill.

R508 Now that's more like it! Sophie looks fab! Not see Edward in that uniform before.

Trooping the Fug. Everyone except Kate is a disaster. Meg looks sweet but her outfit is staid.

MM's dress looks like the plastic cape you wear at the hairdresser.

Sophie's hat looks like a surfboard.

And whilst Andrew, Edward and Anne were reasonably attractive when they were younger, that family must be one of the oddest looking in Britain now.

Kate does look gorgeous in primrose, now that she is smiling. I know I'd be smiling like an angel, being compared to "L'il Mama" MM.

I don't understand why Edward has military medals. None of them except Harry has seen active service.

Well, clearly she's been spending her time juicing and doing yoga!

Why is she carrying black gloves? They should be white, if anything. Black seems so gauche.

R516 Juicing doughnuts by the look of it

[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.]

I love it, R518. Doughnuts, steak, potatoes and pate!

They can start having sex again in two weeks! I wonder what Harry thinks of her new G cup breasts?

And trucker's arse!

Meghan looks appropriate and boring AF.

It would be hilarious if she just continues to get fatter.

She is the princess of lard.

I'd love it R524, too funny

Here Comes Meggy Boo Boo.

[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.]

Andrew doesn't speak plummy, does he?

Princess Anne was beautiful when she was young.

MM looks horrible and will have a hard time losing that weight . I am short and petite like her. I have to watch every calorie. Really.

r515 you must be very young. Andrew has seen active service. He was in the navy for more years than Harry managed in the Army.

I have detested MM since shortly after she appeared on the scene, but seeing these pics of her contrasted with Kate, I only pity her. Game over.

Sophie Winkleman and Princess Michael look like they have nice outfits on, hope to see more pictures. Can't see the Harry and Meggy Boo Boo there, but she might be at the buffet.

Hopefully see the kids when they all come back out again.

Interesting to see that Bea has borrowed Sophie’s dress from Ascot last year.

At least meghan carried and birthed her own child unlike surrogate using kate.

She was playing basketball shortly after having george and her tummy showed and it was clear as a day she never had him. They used a surrogate for whatever reason. She was also caught smoking while supposedly pregnant at the airport. Truth will come out about that one.

The flypast just went over my house - very very loud but couldn't see the planes through the cloud cover

The Three Girl Chorus on the balcony.

Wait? Bea borrowed Sophie’s dress?

Maybe MM is tired. She looks really overwhelmed.

Photos on the balcony. Kate is best dressed.

Overwhelmed and overfed.

I've just seen Meg fly past MY house.

It's hard to believe kate and meghan are the same age. Meghan looks so young whilst kate looks about 10 years older than her age, plus has a droopy face to match even with the dm generously photoshopping her. A magazine editor says the reason for Kate's rictus grin is to hide her collapsing face, I can't help but agree. Yikes.

James looks like he's just been given a strict talking-to by Sophie and Edward.

I won’t take the cheap shot at Meghan for still being heavy; it’s been a month.

The dress is fine. Boring but appropriate. The hat is too small.

What strikes me most is what r439 out. She suddenly looks just like Doria. It’s striking.

Rictus Grin Troll, Rictus Grin Troll,

You're the Rictus Grin Troll.

[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.]

Did someone call my name?

Yoko Oreo must be fuming. Little Louis to appear on the balcony, and all she can bring is her linebacker self.

What is up with the pattern of MM's dress? What do they call that when the shoulder seam runs from the neck to the bottom of the sleeve? It looks like something a nine year old would make on her mother's sewing machine.

Givenchy needs better designers

MM is so petite she looks like a child playing dress up. She suits a much younger styling to match her youthful looks.

Her beautiful tawny dewy complexion really stands out. Last year her tan next to that blush pink made her look so pretty and next to broad shouldered giant kate she looked like a litte doll.

Youthful looks.

Welp, Flower, you got what you asked for.

Happy now?

[R535].Kate didn't use a surrogate you moron. She was on maternity leave until the October after George was born when she played volleyball. and yes her stomach was flat by then as is quite normal in someone slim and fit.

Photos of Andrew, Anne and the rest of the gang on parade. No one does pomp and pageantry (and parades) like the British.

The Queen.

New photo of Charles the Constant Gardener. Because we all know that he doesn't have any help and he does everything himself.

Just caught the finer details of the Queen's outfit, wow. Absolutely beautiful. The matching hat was incredible. Look out for some really good pics to highlight the fabrics, it's not been seen at its best potential, so far.

Nice to see Louis is learning the royal wave already.

Someone who has to starve themselves and smoke to stay thin is not "naturally slim".

If you want to know if someone is naturally slim look at their wrists and face. If you have a gaunt face when you are slim, you are forcing your body into an unnatural state and it shows on your face. The wrists of a natural skinny woman are tiny. Kate doesn't fit the profile of a naturally slim woman. She has a husky muscular athletic build. Google the pics are there. I'm not saying she is brolic, just more muscular and heavier than she tries to be.

Kate looks happy, Meghan looks swollen and Harry looks petulant.

Does the Queen have a dressmaker who makes her wardrobe?

Not sure why the Stans keep comparing Meghan to Kate. They're not in the same league. Kate will be a Queen and Meghan will remain a minor royal no matter how hard she tries. Kate stood on the steps of the hospital 3 times for questions and pictures . MeMe won't tell us where she gave birth, created a huge media circus (and managed piss off most of the british tabloids in particular the Sun) and then graciously allowed 3 questions from 1 journo, dressed to the nines in a palace corridor.

r562 Angela Kelly is the Queen's dressmaker / dresser .

The Cambridge kids at a Palace window.

Louis is the Star of the Show!

Camilla is mumbling while fixing her hat and Harry is chatting while gesturing with his hat. The two Duchess smile.

Meghan's face is still swollen from her pregnancy so when she smiles her eyes almost disappear.

Louis is exciting and wiggly.

Now Louis is in Will's arms.

The Cambridges were standing on the other end of the balcony from the Sussex pair.

R558 if you enjoy traditional couture you may be interested in a visit to Joel and Son, who supply Her Majesty. The couture section shows the type of fabric typically used in Her Majesty's formal wear.

Another poorly made Givenchy outfit for Meghan. Kate is classically tailored.

Lovely, thank you R572

Meghan strategically stands behind James Wessex and Isla Phillips so we won't see her fuller figure.

I don't think Meghan's hat is very flattering. It seems to small and it's not placed on her head properly.

She's playing Hide the Heifer behind two innocent children and it tragically is not working.

Maybe she won't divorce him after all... that pregnancy unleashed her father's genes. She's gone so fat.

[quote]The Cambridges were standing on the other end of the balcony from the Sussex pair.

Probably something to do with the line of succession and physics. If the balcony cracked and fell under the weight of the Megained, Deadweight of Sussex, the Cambridges would have a chance to save themselves, being at the opposite end.

Hold on tight or he'll get away.

Louis is a pistol.

Could be on off but in the photograph at R579, is William sowing the same red sausage fingers that mystify us over his father?

R578 - I think it's mainly because Will can't stand to be near Duchess Yoko. Also, after Savannah clamped her hand across George's mouth last year to Will's displeasure, it was probably decided that George would be separated from that sassy Phillips minx. LOL.

Charles is as red as a beet as usual.

Louis wants to fly like a bird.

This is so good. Very interesting what lady said...

I thought Meghan's navy outfit was poorly made in the carriage but when she took off the top, it's even worse when those white hanging shoulder pads. WTF? How much did she pay for this shit?

R581, you’re right. They’re apparent in r584, too.

R578 Yeah, she can't divorce him looking like that.

Unless there are any blind oligarchs I'm unaware of.

I sense another religion change for Meghan Guilliano-Engelson-Markle-Mountbatten-Windsor's next marriage, one which would enable her to wear Givenchy Burkas, constantly.

Navy outfit with black gloves. She really just doesn't have any sense of style.

Camilla having some fun with Louis.

[quote]Unless there are any blind oligarchs I'm unaware of.

She would translate well in braille. More to love, all that.

The Cambridge family.

Megaind: Harry, you're fucking family is always laughing at me!

Harry: No, darling, they're laughing at something fun. Laughing at another person would be rude. That's why we smirk.

Andrew telling the Queen a yarn. Of course, he's right there beside her. Harry and Meghan are talking to Jack and Eugenie.

A Meghan comparison of last year and this year. Her whole face structure has changed. From oval to square in one year.

Well, Kate achieved perfection in every way.

Meghan at least was low-key.

Kate is wearing a cross. Is that unusual?

R549 probably raglan sleeves which are easier to sew than set in sleeves. These sleeves just look amateurish and make the outfit look rather corporate.

[quote]Meghan at least was low-key

Yes, like a kettle drum. Oversized, noisy when sounding, and best shoved to the back of the band.

quote]Kate is wearing a cross. Is that unusual?

Maybe it was Garlic.

The next thread is up.

Well, poster upthread who wagered Meghan wouldn't appear lost his money. Having appeared, Meghan looks both subdued and appalling. Navy is one of her worst colours, she looks dumpy and out of place, and as always, deliberately out of place. She could be going to a funeral or memoriall service. Kate, by contrast, looks beautifully tailored and turned out, properly dressed, increasingly regal, and very happy.