Meghan Markle

Posted by: TOBYJUG on 27 November 2017

Yes, I can not believe it but I am opening a thread about our Meghan. Since no one else has bothered I take that as maybe a hint that no ones bothered or that everyone's got their head in the sand.

I don't really want to invite criticism of royal spectacle, but would be interested in what others think. To me it reminds me of hifi that looks great on paper but disappointing when auditioned.  

Posted on: 27 November 2017 by Finkfan

From what I’ve seen on Suits she seems lovely.

Posted on: 27 November 2017 by JamieWednesday

The Guardian ran an article about pleased they were because she’s black. They’re getting to be ever more a parody of themselves than The Mail even.

I’ve never met Meghan myself so can’t comment.

Posted on: 27 November 2017 by Tabby cat

The Wedding ring will certainly sparkle on Meghan Markle.

Royal debate aside if their both loved up on each other - good luck to them

No saving up for a mortgage deposit though......

 

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by james n
JamieWednesday posted:

The Guardian ran an article about pleased they were because she’s black. They’re getting to be ever more a parody of themselves than The Mail even.

I’ve never met Meghan myself so can’t comment.

Yes good old Guardian - always an amusing lunchtime read. 

Otherwise good luck to them - they seem very much in love and clearly taken with each other which was lovely to see.  

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Bruce Woodhouse

I'm a passive republican. I don't want to see them dragged into the street and beheaded but I'm quite happy if they quietly drop into the background and do what they do with minimal fuss and interference with real people. Keep bringing in the tourists and shake a few hands but otherwise they are totally irrelevant to me.

The coverage yesterday made me cringe. Two grown ups gurgling  to the world media about how and when he proposed and also their future children. Yuck.

Shame she seemed to have no option but to end her career to 'become Royal'. How 19th century.

Bruce

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Pev

Pl;ease stop - I'm fed up with it already and not even a sodding bank holiday!

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Tony2011

Panem Et Circences.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by ChrisR_EPL

Megan seems like a decent sort. Harry is the most popular royal amongst the younger set from what I can gather, and early 30s is a reasonable time to get married so hurrah for them both. Personally I haven't seen any great degree of fawning and overboard press coverage, mainly because it's very easy to avoid it. 

We're a constitutional monarchy. A potential heir marrying is bound to be newsworthy, and marrying foreigners has been the monarchy's standard behaviour for many centuries; why make a fuss now?

Good luck to em both I say. Nice girl, decent bloke, part of the country's fabric.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by MDS

If they make one another happy, good luck to them. I suppose a media frenzy on the day the engagement was announced was understandable but I see it's still going today and I fear it will go on and on to the wedding and beyond.  I've already started TV channel-hopping to avoid it. And I say all this as a supporter of the monarchy. 

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Christopher_M

It'll be the showbiz event of 2018.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by JamieWednesday

It’s just what the economy needs. Perhaps if it was an annual event?

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
Tony2011 posted:

Panem Et Circences.

Tut tut Tony... saying it in Latin doesn't make it any less of a meaningless cliché.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Tony2011

Says the man with the mock Roman centurion as avatar. 

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Ardbeg10y

Vive la République

I'm active republican which gives quite some serious debates in my family.

Its still a magic miracle to me how the Germans got rid of their nobility and dumped them in other countries over the centuries.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
JamieWednesday posted:

The Guardian ran an article about pleased they were because she’s black. They’re getting to be ever more a parody of themselves than The Mail even.

I’ve never met Meghan myself so can’t comment.

Jamie, the decline of The Groan under its current editor, Katherine Viner, has been truly catastrophic. What was once a great liberal newspaper has degenerated into a pathetic parody if itself, and it has become what its detractors have long accused it of being - a self-satisfied and mean-spirited peddlar of the worst sort of identity politics. Not only that, its articles are often shockingly badly written.

Take a look at this drivel:

https://www.theguardian.com/ar...an-improve-your-life

The newspaper, and many of its readers, smugly like to imagine that they're better than the Mail and its readers, but the Groan and the Mail are just two sides of the same illiberal coin (although the latter is technically a better product, and its circulation is 10 times that of the Guardian's).

It has even been reduced to begging its readers for money.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
Tony2011 posted:

Says the man with the mock Roman centurion as avatar. 

Puer oh Puer oh Puer...

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
Ardbeg10y posted:

Its still a magic miracle to me how the Germans got rid of their nobility and dumped them in other countries over the centuries.

Not historically accurate, I'm afraid. The Haus Hannover ruled in Great Britain & Ireland from 1714  until 1901. Edward VII was - through his father Albert - a member of the Haus Saschen-Coburg Und Gotha and the line continues (though not in name) through to the current Queen, although there's not a great deal of "German blood" in the younger Royals these days.  

The Hohenzollerns ruled Germany (and its predecessors) from the 15th century until 1918 (when "Kaiser Bill" was forced to abdicate). The idea that the Germans "got rid of their nobility" and "dumped them in other countries" is complete and utter garbage.

When the last Stuart Monarch, Queen Anne, died childless in 1714, her cousin George was invited to take over  (all other possible candidates were Catholics, which meant that under the act of Settlement 1701, they were not allowed to ascend the throne).

Blighty has had a constitutional monarchy since the 17th century, while the German monarchs were absolutists until the end. 

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Timmo1341
Tony2011 posted:

Panem Et Circences.

Now you're talking, but only if we get 'to the death' gladiatorial contests. Don't want any endangered animal species slaughtered, just a few lifers picked from HMP's finest!

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Ardbeg10y
Kevin-W posted:
Ardbeg10y posted:

Its still a magic miracle to me how the Germans got rid of their nobility and dumped them in other countries over the centuries.

Not historically accurate, I'm afraid. The Haus Hannover ruled in Great Britain & Ireland from 1714  until 1901. Edward VII was - through his father Albert - a member of the Haus Saschen-Coburg Und Gotha and the line continues (though not in name) through to the current Queen, although there's not a great deal of "German blood" in the younger Royals these days.  

The Hohenzollerns ruled Germany (and its predecessors) from the 15th century until 1918 (when "Kaiser Bill" was forced to abdicate). The idea that the Germans "got rid of their nobility" and "dumped them in other countries" is complete and utter garbage.

When the last Stuart Monarch, Queen Anne, died childless in 1714, her cousin George was invited to take over  (all other possible candidates were Catholics, which meant that under the act of Settlement 1701, they were not allowed to ascend the throne).

Blighty has had a constitutional monarchy since the 17th century, while the German monarchs were absolutists until the end. 

You explain nicely why I wrote 'over the centuries' and 'other countries'. We - the Dutch - have always had a German influx of nobility.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W

Yes but the point is, the Germans didn't actually get rid of their nobility. Germany was one of the last absolute monarchies in Europe. And in many places - I can't speak for the Dutch, but it was the case with the early Hanoverians here in Blighty - they remained in place in their countries while ruling elsewhere (eg GB) simultaneously.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Romi
Kevin-W posted:

Yes but the point is, the Germans didn't actually get rid of their nobility. Germany was one of the last absolute monarchies in Europe. And in many places - I can't speak for the Dutch, but it was the case with the early Hanoverians here in Blighty - they remained in place in their countries while ruling elsewhere (eg GB) simultaneously.

and adopting an English surname so that there is more synergy with us natives...

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
Romi posted:

and adopting an English surname so that there is more synergy with us natives...

Not really. The name was changed from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha because of the huge anti-German sentiment during the Great War.

The British royal family has an unerring instinct for survival. They have always known, since the execution of Charles I and the forced abdication of James II, that they have only ever been in their priveleged position as a result of the tolerance of the citizenry. Since the 17th century, our monarchy has been the weakest in Europe, which paradoxically give it its strength and ensures its survival (though it's going to be interesting to see how Chaz 3 fares).

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Ardbeg10y

Come on, Kevin-w. Philipp is of the house Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. He isn't German either I assume?

And that Mountbatten does not come from Battenberg?

They are all Germans.

 

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by TOBYJUG

The world is watching. I bet it'll end with a Mexit.

Posted on: 28 November 2017 by Kevin-W
TOBYJUG posted:

The world is watching. I bet it'll end with a Mexit.

What if he leaves her? Then it'll be a Hexit.