Community Chat

[alicedee]

The entire royal family is heavily involved in charity work.  Diana got a lot more press because pictures of her “sold”......but all the royals do a great deal for charities.

[Pearlee]

Meghan is sititng in front of Anna Wintour and behind Serena's husband, so apparently she didn't make them clear out the box for her.

[Celticrose]

She lost.  Sorry Meg.  

[jonbon]

---

@Pearlee wrote:

---

@minkbunny wrote:

Supposedly the Duchess had her sights set on a Royal therefore I admire her for achieving her goal.   As far as travel, etc., she certainly was in a position to do so before her marriage as she was very gainfully employed.

I do feel that if one wants to become a member of the Royal family,  one should respect their customs and whatever requirements accompany the duties of the position - as one would with any job that they wanted to maintain.

Wish the couple well but something tells me this will not be a "forever" type of thing unless it is truly a long distance relationship.  But, we shall see.

Anxious to watch little Archie grow up, just know he will be a rogue like his daddy. 

---

@minkbunny   Well, perhaps one day Harry and Meghan will release photos that actually do enable you to see the little guy.    Honestly, I don't know why they can't do like the Cambridges do...such as for little Charlotte's first day at school, release a few chosen photos to the media to satisfy the public and then get on with it.   If M&H did the same thing, they'd get less flak!  They are keeping the kid a closely guarded secret, in fact flipping everyone off who would like to see the little guy.

---

I don't really understand this. They have released photos several times -- shortly after his birth, at his christening, the candids at the polo match. In many, his face is clearly visible. I'm sure more will be forthcoming, when something interesting happens. I don't recall seeing tons of photos of Prince Louis as a small infant, other than his christening, official portraits, etc., either.

[libbyannE]

Frankly, I am tired of and bored with the mean-spirited Meghan bashing. I wd not want to be in her shoes. 

[Snoopp]

---

@alicedee wrote:

I’ve never been an admirer of Harry.  His exploits through the years gave the impression of an entitled party boy.  That rubbed many the wrong way, as he seemed happy to take $ from the British people, but felt he could do whatever he liked.  He’s not a child.   With privilege....funded by the people...comes responsibility.

Now he is trying to portray himself as a big environmentalist....but his actions and choices don’t seem to reflect he is “ walking the walk.”

Though I am not a “fan” of his wife, Harry is the one who rubs me the wrong way.

---

All this carbon footprint talk he does.....pfttttt.  

[Cakers3]

---

@jonbon wrote:

---

@Pearlee wrote:

---

@minkbunny wrote:

Supposedly the Duchess had her sights set on a Royal therefore I admire her for achieving her goal.   As far as travel, etc., she certainly was in a position to do so before her marriage as she was very gainfully employed.

I do feel that if one wants to become a member of the Royal family,  one should respect their customs and whatever requirements accompany the duties of the position - as one would with any job that they wanted to maintain.

Wish the couple well but something tells me this will not be a "forever" type of thing unless it is truly a long distance relationship.  But, we shall see.

Anxious to watch little Archie grow up, just know he will be a rogue like his daddy. 

---

@minkbunny   Well, perhaps one day Harry and Meghan will release photos that actually do enable you to see the little guy.    Honestly, I don't know why they can't do like the Cambridges do...such as for little Charlotte's first day at school, release a few chosen photos to the media to satisfy the public and then get on with it.   If M&H did the same thing, they'd get less flak!  They are keeping the kid a closely guarded secret, in fact flipping everyone off who would like to see the little guy.

---

I don't really understand this. They have released photos several times -- shortly after his birth, at his christening, the candids at the polo match. In many, his face is clearly visible. I'm sure more will be forthcoming, when something interesting happens. I don't recall seeing tons of photos of Prince Louis as a small infant, other than his christening, official portraits, etc., either.

---

@jonbon   I don't get it either.  There are some lovely pictures of wee Archie with his adorable face showing. 

I also don't understand why Meghan is supposed to be like anyone else either.

She is her own person and I don't see picking at all the other royal family members although Fergie took a bit of a beating years ago.

Meghan doesn't get "flak" because of photos; she gets flak because she is Meghan.

[bathina]

Will and Kate's kids are in direct line to the throne. Archie is not, Mia Tindall is not, Louise Windsor is not. Has anyone insisted that Zara and Edward provide photos of their children to the public? No?

What's that you say? Louise and Mia aren't fascinating to the general public like Archie? 

The Duke and Duchess don't owe anyone photos, videos or anything else of their 4 month old baby. Just because the public has a fascination doesn't mean the baby's parents have to comply. 

We've seen photos of the child. We'll see more during their Africa tour.

For people who dislike this couple so much, they sure want to see more and of them.