| The Duchess of Sussex will be guest editor for the upcoming September edition of British Vogue magazine. The Duchess spoke to former First Lady Michelle Obama for an interview that will be included in September issue. In addition to that, The Duchess of Sussex will do interviews with some powerful faces and leaders such as actresses Jane Fonda, Salma Hayek and New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and many more for the British Vogue September issue. |
| The front of the magazine will feature 15 women who are "trailblazing changemakers, united by their fearlessness in breaking barriers", according to Buckingham Palace. "The Duchess has curated the content with British Vogue’s Editor-in-Chief Edward Enninful to create an issue that highlights the power of the collective,” says Sunday’s announcement by Sussex Royal. "They have named the issue: ‘Forces for Change." |
| The September issue includes an interview between The Duchess and famous conservationist, ethologist and primatologist Dr. Jane Goodall, as well as pieces penned by actress Jameela Jalil and author and professor Brené Brown. “Guest Editing the September issue of UK Vogue has been rewarding, educational and inspiring,” The Duchess said in a statement. “To deep dive into this process, working quietly behind the scenes for so many months, I am happy to now be able to share what we have created. A huge thanks to all of the friends who supported me in this endeavour, lending their time and energy to help within these pages and on the cover.” |
Also stimmen die Gerüchte von Anfang des Jahres, dass Meghan und die Vogue UK zusammenarbeiten für die September-Ausgabe.
ReplyDeleteIch bin gespannt auf das Ergebnis.
-Elisabeth-
... Ich nicht...
DeleteWhen I let go of this news, I thought, like everyone else, that the criticism would be extreme. There is no right day. It has to be done.
DeleteMy heart breaks for her, for the criticism of this that is sure to come.
ReplyDeleteCall me dumb, stupid or whatsoever, but I don't see why Meghan should be criticised for this.
DeleteI'm just happy for her!
I thought pretty much the same thing, Casey. God forbid she should have an independent thought, or ask others there's, now that she is part of the BRF. If it were Harry or Wills doing it for "GQ" of "Sports Illustrated," or even one of the ladies born into the BRF, no problem. Good for them! But this upstart newcomer who doesn't know her place? Noooooo.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteAnon 12:08, you must have the gift of foresight to already know the September issue then... Enlighten us all, please!
DeleteAt "Anonymous July 30, 2019 at 12:08 AM"
DeleteHow do you know that when the articles and interviews haven't even been done yet?! *That's* what we're saying. Whether you like the person or not it's unfair to criticize something they haven't even done yet. Wow!
Casey, you called it. You'd think Meghan was kicking puppies for all the attacks lobbed her way. There are some people in this world who are doing truly evil things. Meghan is on the other end trying to shed a little light. Meghan actually turned down appearing on the cover herself--unlike Catherine...also not a crime.
DeleteIt is quite realistic to suppose that the content is related to the pictures of the women we have all seen already. And these women are prominent and glitzy, most of them having to do either nothing with "Change" or if yes, then in a vague manner politically. As somebody else noticed here, there is definitely an air of lefty feminism here - which represents Meghans political preference (and of all other lefty self-confessed women) and nothing else. If she wants to show us merit and women that really make a difference, she should look for some that really do - instead of showing us prominency. Her choice is a fact (on the basis of the fotos), independently of the verbal contect and it is this choice I am criticising. -- Ann
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete@ Ann: you summerized it to the point …agree!
Delete@ you are exactly right. It's only a lot of bla bla bla from a bunch of privileged people who don't know a thing about daily life.
Delete@ Pine: don't think one can compare Duchess Catherine's fashionista Vogue cover with this feminist-political issue. I have my opinion about this whole stuff but won't write down, because every single comment that criticise Meghan is removed.
Deleteje suis comme vous. Il y a sûrement dans tous ces commentaires sur elle, beaucoup de racisme ... Il faut être forte pour résister à cette vague de "méchancetés". Quelle est la vérité dans tous ces articles à charge ?
ReplyDeletec'était pareil pour Kate il y a quelque temps.
j'aimerai pouvoir ne pas m'arrêter sur tout ça, mais c'est insidieux et ça s'infiltre dans nos esprits. Zellie
Oh wow, this is what we all have been waiting for. Not.
ReplyDeleteNot a good idea. Not for any royal (as this is way too political), and certainly not for someone who has only just entered the royal family and is criticized a lot already (justified or not). Letting Meghan do this is asking for trouble.
DeleteI don't read Vogue, and I'm not the least bit tempted to buy that September issue either. Judging by the cover, it's a bit heavy on the lefty feminist side.
- Vanessa
Such an unnecessary comment.
DeleteWhy??
DeleteAt the naysayers; I really don't see how this is much different than what Diana did to promote landmine clean up, etc. The times are different so the medium is a bit different but I have no doubt that if performing as a guest editor for Vogue would have worked to get attention on the land mines - or aids - she would have done it.
DeleteMaybe instead of being in the stone age Vanessa, remember it's 2019 and it's idiotic to think Royals don't and shouldn't be able to express themselves. We're in an age of change and I think Royals should be able to take stance. As public figures they should. That cover is AMAZING, why to hate on your own gender.
DeleteYes, but Diana had years of experience before embarking into such big missions
DeleteI agree with you, Vanessa; to me this seems like a way for the duchess to promote her own political opinions and preferences (and at this point in time, there is a very strong political aspect to her choices, like it or not). I think it is a misuse of her prominent position, and time will tell whether she is capable of putting the royal family and Britain first, and her personal opinions second.
DeleteWell said, Jane Chantal!
DeleteVanessa and JaneChantal, you both make good points here. There is indeed nothing wrong with the idea itself, but given all the criticism she already has gotten and the fact that she is nor a member of the Royal Family... they could have waited. But indeed, time will tell, we'll see.
DeleteAnd Anon 2:15, be kind. Vanessa made a good point and she is not 'living in the stone age' and (nobody's opinion) is definitely not 'idiotic'.
Anonymous 2:15 remember another 'age of change' and a very 'woke' prince who supported the fashionable movement of the day - fascism. Meghan is walking in Edward VIII's footsteps.
DeleteSuccessful royals are timeless - they appeal to all, they don't offend.
Everyone here should take a politician or public figure whose views are completely opposite to what they believe in and then say: "I think royals should support that person" and realise how wrong that sounds. Then maybe they will understand why there is so much concern about Meghan.
O whoopsie, I see that I wrote Meghan is not a member of the Royal Family, but I meant that she is not a member for a long time. Excuse me ;-)
DeleteAnon 2:15 is a total hypocrite. She asks Vanessa why she is hating on her own gender yet she attacks Vanessa and calls her idiotic. Anon 2:25 you are hating on your own gender!
Delete@Julia 10:53 AM -- THANK YOU. Imo your last paragraph hits the nail squarely on the head. I know of an articulate woman of color, definitely courageous and a "change-maker" who is having an impact on both sides of the pond -- her name is Candace Owens. I wonder what the reaction would be to a member of the royal family putting her on a magazine cover, or giving her a platform by interviewing her for a major publication. I think I can guess.
DeleteA nother non royal job.More power to her!. I just cancelled my membership to Vogue HB and a other magazine. I spent way too much on these, after reading them and hand them down to someone else, they go to the recycle pen, what a wast. What I spent a year on these is a great amount of money, which now goes to 2 children's cancer Hospitals, for Veteran's and the Foodbank. Congrats to the Dss for this gig.
ReplyDeletePower? To me, it sounds you think Meghan is power hungry... Why do you think this gives her more 'power'? Lots of royalty have been in magazines and being promoting things, giving their opinions... was that also for more power?
Delete@Rosalyn--It is an expression. "Definition of 'more power' to someone. US, informal. —used to say that one approves of what someone is doing and hopes it will be successful."
DeleteO thank you, chardonn8r, for the explanation. English is not my first language, so I might interpretate things wrong or write something the wrong way. Thank you for clarifying and your kind response. I'm glad that is still possible! :-)
DeleteI'm happy to help! I have the same difficulty translating some things as well.
DeleteToo soon!After a few years experience of engagement yes. She is being asked to promote Vogue.The wonderful Countess of Wessex should be a role model and mentor,marrying into the Royal family in your 30s,after a independent life.I had hoped för a olive branch to elderly father,which was so badly managed by Harry and her.He hasnt meet her father.Nor she in past years.Peace starts at Home,then the World.
ReplyDeleteUnknown, so you think she should wait? What, a perfect wave? That’s why I really like her, she rolls up her sleeves and acts. My grandma was waiting for her turn or something, my mum also, and I do the same. Meanwhile the world goes on. She is a wonderful role model. Looking forward for reading Vogue.
DeleteIt is not our place to speculate or demand that other families mirror a certain template. Many families do not. Seeking scraps of information from the lives of others to chew on is voyeuristic.
DeleteIt is not the fact that she does something like this. But the content of what she did ist just pure hypocrisy. These women stand for change?? No, they stand for themselves, they stand for being prominent and mostly photogenic too (with the odd less photogenic one of course, a must among so many attractive and prominent women). This is just glitzy content for which she should not lend her name and position. There are a lot of charities that do real valuable good things for non-prominent people, this is where her place should be as a member of the royal family. So this is a big big No No for me and it turns my benevolent neutrality towards the Duchess into something negative.
ReplyDeleteWow, you said it well. Also, if you check closely into the activities of some of these women, you may be shocked. I like Meghan for her humanitarianism..she should not promote controversial feminism. AND just as a reader said earlier, the haters are having a hayday! So sad.
DeleteD’accord!
DeleteHere is Kate's Vogue Cover. https://www.newmyroyals.com/2016/05/duchess-catherine-on-cover-of-british.html
DeletePerhaps this is Meghan's place? ...Silence.
Trying to give voice to other women is a big big No No?
I will buy the magazine and share with others the knowledge of how women from other cultures cope with adversity or success, and hope that it turns their benevolent neutrality towards the Duchess into a beacon of light for them.
You should read about the women. I'm particularly impressed with Jacinda Arden, Prime Minister of Australia. I doubt she was trying to be photogenic.
DeleteScott Morrison is the Prime Minister in Australia.
DeleteTo Marigold's "Trying to give voice to other women" : Dear Marigold, these (partly very privileged) women have a lot of space for their voices. She has chosen the ones that do not need more than what they already have in all the Vogues of the world.
DeleteTHANKS! Correction: Arden is PM of New Zealand.
DeleteDid you know of all of these women before today?..and what about the women who will be inspired by this? Partly privileged implies that the others are therefore underprivileged? Who speaks for the women who cannot speak for themselves? Sitting in a privileged first world country and do nothing, while women are denied education (Malala), act as the family workhorse in many agrarian societies, married off to old men at a young age in others...we can go on..it is easy to wait for Meghan articles to criticize. In the minds of some, the message and the messenger are unfortunately,.. the same . History has not been kind to women as a whole, and anyone who advances the cause should not have to watch the other women at her back. "Well behaved women seldom make history" Laurel Thatcher Ulrich.
DeleteCan't wait to get a copy! Many of the women in that edition have done good works that have made a difference. I see nothing she has done as guest editor that should generate such ugly criticism. I truly think she is trying to fit in her new role, which must be difficult with all the invective. I think she learned being strong willed was how to survive in Hollywood. I think it would help to have a mentor to give her more insight on royal protoccol.
ReplyDeleteWhat a shame that the criticism has started before the Vogue issue has even hit the newsstands. “Too soon”, “crap content”, “too political” ??? I disagree. Let’s read the content before we rush to judgement. (V.M.)
ReplyDeleteWell said, V.M.! For as far we don't have the gift of foresight, there's not much to judge. We may have an opinion about the idea itself, but nobody knows the content. September will tell us.
DeleteI feel genuinely sorry for her. She still doesn't seem to understand the difference between royalty and celebrity. It seems that she is being very badly advised or perhaps more likely the people she has around her are not royal family regulars who would warn her of the pitfalls of this kind of endeavour. One report I read says that Amal Clooney advised her to go for this which really says it all.
ReplyDeleteThe editor of Vogue has claimed that Meghan allegedly stated that she would rather guest edit than appear on the cover, as this would be "boastful" which seems like a veiled dig at Catherine, who appeared in the centenary edition(looking amazing!)and also at her late mother in law, Diana, who appeared on the cover more than once. (always looking amazing!)
I don't think she will even understand the backlash that there is against what she has done and I am concerned that unless she gets decent advice from people who know what being a royal entails it could all go badly wrong for her and for Harry.
Well said, I don't have anything about being on Vogues cover is just the timing and subject that seems too celebrity like
DeleteAgree. Very well said, Annie M.
DeleteYou also make some valid points, AnnieM. Let's hope things are not getting wrong for the couple and especially Meghan, since she made her choice to do this. On the other hand, we don't know the content yet and perhaps it's not as bad as lots of people think. I like the idea itself (other Royals have been in magazines and giving opinions in public too) but it's quite soon, for she is not that long a member of the Royal Family and has been criticised a lot. Let's hope she was advised really well about the contents before she started this.
DeleteAnnieM,princess Anne,Katherine and Diana was covered of Vogue.What's wrong to same people?Pure hate,bullies and racisme and why not jealousis.What horror.
DeleteAno 8:33 I think everyone knows what’s “wrong”. I’m very proud of Meghan and her giving voice for many women. Instead of being on cover herself she went on and gave the spotlight for others. The little person who talks about fashion and her dreams - to be honest I’d never heard before and now I think that she is amazing.
DeleteThe magazine has not come out yet, but the oracles have spoken about its content. In addition to all the women in our lives who have made a difference, here are other women with achievements that we can all celebrate. We can even encourage others who may have had the same dreams but not the gumption to pursue them. Women criticizing Meghan and making rules for when and how she should participate in royal duties as a decorative spouse pushes the true beneficiaries of the articles back into obscurity, and that was not Vogue's intent at all. There must be some shame in repeating the opinions of others with no supporting facts.
ReplyDeleteKudos to Meghan for doing this but the cover itself looks like an Instagram pictures. And yes, some of the choices were unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteAs a royalist, I am interested in the immediate royal family. As stated Harry and Meghan have set up some parallel universe;so remember Wallis Simpson,and Co that is what you get.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly is a royalist?
DeleteWell said.
DeleteA royalist supports all humanitarian endevours of the royal family in an apolitical way nonsexist;eg Her Majesty knows her role and is a well loved and respected member of the royal family she is Majesty;not celebrity.
Delete@Anon 11:40 Just a comment about Meghan's "celebrity". She was not well known by any means. Before getting a supporting role on a cable TV show (lower viewership), she was an extra on a game show. She also made a couple of Hallmark movies. She was not really a "celebrity" the way she has been made out to be by the tabloids. She was a very hard working woman that wanted to be an actress and was building a career. I understand that the stories the rags print about her sound much more scandalous when making her out to be more famous than she was, but it just isn't true. Her show was shot in Canada, not Hollywood, for financial reasons. Major network shows are usually shot here in the States, usually Hollywood, some in New York.
DeleteHer humanitarian efforts began long before entering the royal family, and she was promoting equality between men and women when she was a child, writing letters to help get a sexist commercial changed when she was 11-years-old. She is not exploiting her "celebrity", she is merely doing as she has always done, but has the name recognition to try and make a bigger difference now. It doesn't matter if we all agree with her, she is trying to make a difference.
Keep in mind that Prince Philip ridiculed Charles for years for his opinions on the environment and organic farming (among other things). He was merely ahead of the times.
Bravo chardonn8r
DeleteThank you, Chardonn8r, for the reality check. You describe Meghan before she met Harry accurately. The tabloids have distorted much about her.
DeleteShe said she interviewed Michelle Obama "over a casual lunch of chicken tacos and her ever burgeoning bump". Turns out it was just an email interview - they didn't even talk. Why would she make something like that up? Why would she create a whole story that wasn't true? Its so disrespectful - to all parties - to the reader, to Ms Obama. I'm sorry, I'm just so confused about this.
ReplyDeleteMeghan has told about both things. So instead of accusing her of being a liar why not to think what really happened. They were changing emails and they met. You remember Mrs. Obama was in London and there were rumors Dutchess and Mrs Obama meeting? So there you have it.
DeleteI am so pleasantly surprised to see that Chimammanda Adichie made this list. I have never heard of her until I recently picked up a copy of her book Americanah, which I am enjoying a great deal this summer. I've listened to some interviews with her and she is fabulous, smart, delightful.I am thrilled to know she's going to get some extra attention through this.
ReplyDeleteIt is so sad to read all of these negative comments. I'm excited about Meghan and all that she is doing. It's a new model for royalty and I think it's grand.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Change and transition are always difficult, however, I think Meghan could partner with others in the RF to fully understand the protoccols and standards.
DeleteA "humanitarian" who spends vast amounts of money for clothes. A "feminist" who treats her own employees in a way that they quit their jobs. A "role model" who tells others to protect the environment while flying in a private jet to her party in New York.
ReplyDeleteI don't buy it!
These are all rumors and twisted truth. Very sad that people feel they need to spread things like that all over internet.
DeleteAll rumours? I don't think so!
DeleteExactly what I am thinking...
DeleteBravo to you Coralie for being brave enough to say the truth. While the information regarding her employees may or may not be hearsay. Your other points are not rumor or twisted truth. They are facts that can be checked on. Annie M said it well on a previous post. Meghan really does not seem to know the difference between celebrity and royalty.
Delete@ Coralie not surprising that your uplifting opinion is based on tabloid fodder. Every company fires employees who are not up to standard. At Meghan's level that is what good clothes cost. If the family does not mind then... If your friends want to honor you with a baby shower and throw in a private jet to the venue why refuse. There are thousands of planes flying 24/7. Her carbon footprint will not blot out the sun. Plastic bags and pesticides are far more harmful.
DeleteAnonymous 9:23, Queen Letizia for example always dresses impeccable and spends only a fraction of Meghans amounts - as a Queen, not as the wife of sixth in line.
DeleteCoralie, have you ever thought about how much Meghan braught/brings to the BRF and the British fashion industry?
DeleteThese articles will show you the impact Meghan Markle really has.
www.vogue.de
Der "Meghan-Effekt: Die modische Macht von Meghan Markle or
www.elle.com
The Meghan Markle Effect:Her True Impact on the Fashion Industry
P.s. queen Letizia was and still is critisized by the Spanish press because of wearing Hugo Boss too often.
fabiana
It could be that these are insinuations owed to the tabloid? Please do not sell lies as truth. Lying until something becomes a truh - unfortunately very possibble.
Delete@ Coralie. Queen Letizia moves with a grace and fluidity that makes the high street things that she wears more magnificent than they really are. However, she is constrained by a small budget and the brutal criticism of the Spanish press...which leaves her shopping for sale items of sometimes lower level brands. The British treat their royal appearances differently.
Delete@Lily, in the entire presentation so far the minutiae has caught your attention. Perhaps She was having a lunch of tacos and trading emails with Mrs. Obama. Interviewing someone on another continent can take many forms. Conference calls, video conferencing, instagram, emails etc.
ReplyDeleteHi friends.. as I just returned from my yearly trip to one of the most impoverished countries where women lack everything from health to protection, and having wifi and time (for the first time in a while) I just wanted to have some levity , and I wasn't even going to comment on this issue, as is just a collaboration with a well known publication, and it focuses on women and their contribution to society, nothing to be setting our hair on fire. I will read the articles as some of them are familiar to me. I must say that the level of righteousness and viciousness of some of the bloggers continues to astonish me. I am so sorry that this woman with her faults and virtues will continue to be attacked by those blinded by their agendas and lack of empathy.
ReplyDeleteYou were missed. As you can see, nothing has changed.
Delete@Cherry Blossom: In general I like your comments in this blog. But now you are making personal judgements about the character of people whose opinion you don't share ... what a pity. Being critical and giving reasons for it is neither an attack nor is it righteousness or lack of empathy (or whatever else you seem to attest those whose opinion you do not like). I thought this is a place for a civilized exchange of differing views. -- Ann.
DeleteEveryone can have an opinion and yours is not the right one for us all....and I am so happy for that.
DeleteI ageee with Ann and Mina
DeleteBravo Cherry Blossom.
ReplyDeleteWell...one fact is obvious to me. People seem to either love or hate Meghan. They either believe she is genuine or believe she is fake. Whether she is in this marriage for love or not will only be revealed over time.
ReplyDeleteStange statement.
Delete@9:35 The marriage belongs to her and Harry, not idle speculators. Let's be real here. 1. Harry looks a lot like her ex. 2. She is much better educated and can navigate in other languages 3. He brings to the table, jobs assigned by his grandmother, a house leased to them by grandma or owned by the national trust. 4.She complements him by being good at public speaking and actively participating in his causes as well as hers. 5. As a working person, she earned a salary and has some money of her own. 6. No one forced him to the altar. At the age of 35 he must have seen or dated enough women to make a comparison before choosing. 7. Of the brothers, Harry needs a wife who is more of a nurturer. 8. He has chosen, wish him happiness. Finally, these two are essentially 'commoners'. They will never reach the throne and they know it and accept it which is what the 'fake' pundits should also do. For this reason they try to work on projects that will give them a fulfilling life.
DeleteAnon @3:19 AM, that was a very good comment. Something to think about before judging Meghan. I am so glad that Greta Thunberg is with those other great ladies. Pierre Gasiraghi will be sailing with @team_malizia with Greta to USA for the UN climate action in august because she does not want to fly. That's amazing done from Pierre Gasiraghi and his team.
Delete@Anon 3:19: Agree with almost all, but not with this: "Finally, these two are essentially 'commoners'." No, they are not commoners. They live from taxpayers' money because they are part of an institution, the British RF. This is not really your typical commoner :-). And this is where the clash originates: They are scrutinized exactly because of the fact that they cost a lot of money and people have partly rightful expectations, ie. they should represent something more than themselves and their pet ideas. And then, these priviliged people, in this case Meghan, popularize other priviliged people who mostly already stand in the limelight and don't need an additional one from the Royal Family ...
DeleteYou see, I am just not very much interested in Meghan's feminism because I expect her to deliver something in the name of the RF and not that much exclusively in her own name. The Insitution pays for her, it was her choice to be part of it - then she should behave accordingly, I think that would be fair. -- Ann.
@Ann. Royalty is a man made construct that truly means nothing. If they stand in a group of similar people no one would know. They have been installed there and maintained for centuries because politicians do not want to responsible for putting an end to it. With their absolute power gone, they have positioned themselves in a parliamentary monarchy as arbitrators, goodwill ambassadors, promoters of good works, charities, source of tourism etc. ...all for a very good life. There are others in that family who offer very little and do not get the 'Meghan treatment'. If they all went away tomorrow, the country would still function. The rest of us have professions, they do royal.
DeleteThe constant harping on privileged people ignores that many of them come from humble beginnings. Mrs Obama and the lady boxer are examples. Why not shed light on their stories.
Asking Meghan to deliver projects in the name of the royal family is nebulous at best. What are we talking about? Dressing up and shaking hands in the street and talking to the less fortunate. When they leave, most of the people are still in the same position as the were before the visit....and most charities survive on grants from the government, not only donations.
Feminism is just a term for women helping other women. People who get carried away by the term give men all the 'weapons' they need to keep women in their 'place'.
There are thousands of colleges and universities in the USA, and Meghan graduated from one of the better ones and actually worked. As long as the family agrees with her projects, who are we to decide what should be delivered in their name?
Your choice is not to buy the mag or read the article.
Ann from 10:32 AM, very well said. I believe you are right. I agree with you.
Delete@Anonymous at 2:43 PM - No one here, in expressing an opinion, is purporting to "decide what should be delivered in their name". (Are you, in giving your opinion, doing that? I didn't think so.) Buying or not buying the magazine is certainly one way of registering concern about its content -- but as we all are potentially impacted by that content, it is legitimate to speak, as well.
Delete@Zucchina ..happy to hear from Pierre Casiragie and his support for Creta Tunberg, both have real courage.
DeleteThank you Anon 2:42 for your opinion.
Delete@Anon3:19 yes and they want to make a difference - there is nothing wrong with them.
DeleteAnon 2:43 - "Royalty is a man made construct that truly means nothing." Maybe not for you, but of course it does mean quite a lot, or else it would not survive.For a lot of people it does mean very much, see polls about the monarchy. And as long the majority of British subjects want to keep the monarchy, this is proof enough that it *does* mean a lot. - As for man made constructs: Religion, politics, democracy etc. are also man-made constructs, partly strictly necessary, partly not, but always full of meaning for a lot of people. - Charities are very noble undertakings, supporting them is an excellent job, even if they cannot survive without grants. - Feminism is all right with me. But not glamour-feminism with a Jacinda Arden (what is exactly her feminist merit?) whom I would not recognize based on this "beautiful" photo. -- Anyway, I will keep clear of this topic from now on, fashion is more fun and much less irritating :-) -- Ann.
DeleteAnn Yes you are correct;they are people dressed in fancy packaging;their IQ'S are below most individuals they are trained to be smart;at functions they are always greeted by people they know and then introduced to others;the sheriffs in each county are given that specific role;as are the governors or governors general in countries like Australia,New Zealand etc.They are always made to feel comfortable were ever they go.They don't like unfamiliar surroundings.They think they are above the rest of us ;as that is what we are told. They are a rare species that will die out if we stop looking and fussing over them;but most presidents think they will fill that role so what do you do?
DeleteAnon at 3.19AM: Just a note: Harry is NOT a commoner. You certainly know the ranking in the British Royal Family? Doesn't matter if he reaches the throne or not...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @8:21 or Ann, I get that you disagree with my opinion, that's the way debate works. I do stand by my assertion that some of the viciousness, passive aggressive, and agenda driven comments are a sad reflection of the ones making them, I have no horse on this race, I don't know any of the royals portrayed on this blog, but I have. the decency of not demeaning them, and go around repeating all the idiocy that the rags publish in order to sell.
ReplyDeleteI don't tolerate this gossip and rumor mill about, my friends, sisters, colleagues etc., and I speak out when it happens, so..... the same rule applies for these public figures.
Best regards and have a wonderful day.
A Royal cannot pick out People who deserve to be recognized för a magazine, Unless för a medal,CBE etc.on behafe of the country as Sovereign.William hates drama,gimmicks,surprises I read in english press.He doesnt appreciate Meghans antics.Cant blame him.Harry is being bulldozed.
ReplyDeleteDie Idee an sich ist gut. Aber hätte sie nicht ganz normale Frauen auswählen können? Was ist mit all den Frauen, die nicht privilegiert sind und sich jeden Tag durch das Leben kämpfen müssen? Hier hätte sie ihr Engagement zeigen können. Und wer aus dieser Bevölkerungsschicht kann sich tatsächlich eine "Vogue" leisten? "Vogue" ist in meinen Augen eine elitäre Zeitschrift. Die Duchess tut mir schon ein wenig leid. Sie möchte Gutes tun, aber irgendwie geht es immer "nach hinten" los.
ReplyDeleteMona
Good point, Mona!
DeleteSie sollte sich besser um ihr Kind kümmern - ist es zuwenig Publicity ??
ReplyDeleteWas?? Ich bin sicher, dass Archie alles in Ordnung hat. Das Kind hat jedoch auch ein Vater.
DeleteSurprising Meghan! She is great, love her commitment and flair.
ReplyDeleteMARIE
Post a Comment
(We will not publish anonymous comments that were posted without stating a name or nickname)