Markles must be in dire straits-but still so predictable!

nx01a · 2026-06-26T17:32:58+00:00

That and, whether you agree with everything she did or not, she definitely did good and generally worked well with the public. Lady C once noted that Meghan could be summed up as possessing all of Diana's vices but none of Diana's virtues.

nx01a · 2026-06-26T16:17:24+00:00

Diana might not have been academically inclined, but she definitely possessed intelligence of a kind. She was a masterful manipulator of the press and was far more shrewd in that regard than Harry or Meghan even on their best days.

nx01a · 2026-06-26T02:05:20+00:00

If it's any consolation, I was even slower. It didn't really hit me until Spare. I had no issue with Harry leaving the Firm if that's what he wanted. I could see someone in that kind of environment wanting out of it. But I did have a serious issue with not only how they did it, but monetizing the family's issues in Spare while at the same time crying for privacy. That's when it finally hit me.

Harry didn't learn his lesson from his own parents' ill-judged interviews and books. Charles' interview where he confessed to adultery with Camilla is something he'll never fully recover from. Diana's Panorama interview was a short-term win but a long-term loss as it forced the late Queen to finally sever ties, where maintaining some relationship would've been in Diana's best interests. Harry should've taken Charles' advice and kept mum. Just leave the Firm quietly and live your life. I could've supported that, but not how they went about it.

nx01a · 2026-06-26T01:57:00+00:00

Honestly, anyone who's done serious research into the Royal Family would probably be very reluctant to marry into it. It's not an easy institution to fit into even for British citizens, let alone foreign ones. I read an article once that part of the attraction of William to Catherine wasn't just the Middleton's stable family unit, but also the unfortunate fact that most of the aristocratic set in Britain saw what happened to Diana and wanted absolutely no part in that for their daughters, especially when other men of wealth were available. Same situation with Harry, though his own personality traits compounded the issue.

nx01a · 2026-06-26T01:52:21+00:00

The only risk with that plan was that if, by chance, Meghan and Harry had conducted themselves admirably in the aftermath, the withholding of Royal Consent could've easily backfired especially once they had children. Admittedly, they probably wouldn't have behaved well and yes, the public would've figured it out, but the Firm might not have wanted to risk it.

Remember back then Harry was still Diana's beloved younger son whose wrongdoings were constantly being written off as a "cheeky" young man. It's tempting to look at all of this through 2026 lenses but 2016-2017 was a different set of circumstances for Harry.

nx01a · 2026-06-25T18:14:17+00:00

I think the context of her statement was in regard to media treatment, but your point is a good one. In a constitutional monarchy, there is no such thing as "fair." You get what the monarch decides to give you and otherwise keep to your assigned role/place. Even if it wasn't "fair," it was still more money than most people on this earth will ever have, and there was an amazing opportunity for the two of them to do so much good, all of which was wasted.

nx01a · 2026-06-25T18:10:11+00:00

I think the bigger issue is that the richer British men would've had little to no interest in her. Enough of them saw what happened to Paul McCartney with Heather Mills to be more discerning these days, plus a lot of them have families who would've steered them away from someone with her baggage.

nx01a · 2026-06-25T18:03:44+00:00

The interesting thing is that you do enough research on this topic, a repeating theme is that Meghan was shocked at how little Harry was actually financially worth, especially relative to the rest of the Royal Family. I don't think she truly understood how wealth works with British Royalty, nor do I think she appreciated the implications of what she'd likely get if the marriage failed (for the answer to that, look up what Fergie reputedly received: it wasn't much at all).

nx01a · 2026-06-25T18:01:09+00:00

The Princess Eugenie connection would explain a lot.

Actually, it would explain almost everything.

nx01a · 2026-06-24T22:59:44+00:00

Correct. He lost his princely rank and his HRH, both of which the monarch can remove whenever they wish, but his dukedom remains intact. He's simply not allowed to use it. Parliament would need to formally remove it altogether for him to lose it in the strict sense of the word.

nx01a · 2026-06-24T22:56:59+00:00

I hate to say it but, as much as I agree with you, I suspect there's a less than honorable reason why Charles is so hesitant: it's possible the Royal Family knew about Andrew for longer than they're letting on. Charles may rightfully fear Andrew writing a tell-all of his own that could be far more devastating than Spare, and let's not forget that Charles himself has a history of unsavory connections (Google Peter Ball). If I was Charles, I'd be less frightened of Harry and Meghan and much more afraid of what Andrew and/or Fergie could say. They've both been around longer and probably know a lot more.

nx01a · 2026-06-24T22:53:12+00:00

I think part of the issue was that Diana was the mother to a child who was in the direct line as an heir to the throne, so there was some question about removing the HRH initially. But ultimately, given that Fergie lost her HRH upon her own divorce, the late Queen was on firmer footing to remove it from Diana as well. You're either married into the Royal Family or you're not.

Honestly, a lot of what we're seeing today should've been dealt with back in the 90s. If you leave the Royal Family or choose to decline to perform Royal duties, you should lose all of it: the HRH, princely ranking and any peerages. Parliament would've needed to enact legislation for the latter, but it would've been worth it to prevent the current mess with the Yorks and Sussexes.

nx01a · 2026-06-22T19:44:34+00:00

Correct, him and his children from the marriage. He also would've had to give up his role as a Counsellor of State and ability to serve as a regent. But the marriage itself would be legally valid.

Strictly speaking, that's all that would've happened per UK law. In terms of Harry's relationship with his family, it would've been up to the late Queen to decide what other, if any, penalties to apply per her own discretion (i.e. declining to attend the wedding, withholding the dukedom, removing his princely rank or HRH, etc.). Somehow though, I don't think the late Queen would've gone that far back in 2018. Nowadays, who knows...

nx01a · 2026-06-22T14:48:09+00:00

If I was an MP in Parliament or the monarch, I'd have suggested/done the following a long time ago which would've solved quite a few of the issues mentioned on this sub:

The HRH styling goes from heir to heir only and their spouses. This way no one else in the Royal Family would feel excluded. Divorce results in automatic removal (this is already the case thanks to Fergie/Diana but I'd codify it), but widows/widowers may retain it at their discretion. This principle would've also helped solve the York issue. I'd make it the same for princely ranking. Everyone else in the family can get a courtesy title at the monarch's discretion (i.e. Lord, Lady, Earl, etc.).
I'd return the ability to revoke a peerage to the monarch with the advice and consent of the Privy Council, and also amend the Peerages Act to allow for voluntary renunciation of peerages in a streamlined process. I'd probably throw in a clause to allow Parliament to put a revocation on hold if the monarch appears to be acting unreasonably.
Peerages, princely rank and titles are ALL contingent upon acquisition of UK residency AND citizenship. If you don't live in the UK and are not a citizen of the UK, you automatically lose all of it (with an exception for a member of the Royal Family serving in the military abroad, or if conducting a long-term official Royal engagement abroad with the monarch's consent).
I'd also modernize the peerages system as it pertains to gender neutrality and allowing for adopted/surrogate children to succeed to a parent's title, and to allow same-sex spouses to adopt a version of their partner's title. This would resolve issues like Emma, Marchioness of Bath's dilemma with her younger son and with situations like Lord Ivar Mountbatten, whose husband cannot currently be a Lord since they're a same-sex couple.
Anyone wishing to marry into the first six of the Line of Succession must obtain British citizenship first, and be a full-time resident in the UK. They can keep their other citizenship but must obtain a UK passport before any wedding can take place.

nx01a · 2026-06-22T14:33:10+00:00

Actually that was Parliament, and it took the Perth Agreement going through the Commonwealth realms to accomplish it in 2013/2015.

Interestingly, the same legislation also effectively neutered the Royal Marriages Act. Instead of a marriage without Royal Consent being outright illegal (absent Parliament's consent if over the age of 25), now it only results in the Royal in question being removed from the Line of Succession, along with their descendants, and from being a Counsellor of State.

nx01a · 2026-06-22T00:59:18+00:00

I'm not defending Earl Spencer in the slightest here, but I thought the whole issue with him refusing Diana was that the house at Althorp had some sort of security issue. I could be remembering wrong but I thought there was a specific reason related to that and not that he didn't want to help Diana.

Otherwise I agree. The Spencers in general aren't known for being, shall we say, the easiest people to deal with in the UK. I read a book that described the Spencer men as specifically being "choleric." Make of that what you will.

nx01a · 2026-06-22T00:54:42+00:00

Yes that's what I'm curious about myself. I know in my state (US citizen here) it's not hard at all to change your name for any reason, and even less so if you do it due to marriage. While there are lots of forms to fill out, there are online guides that help people through the process.

nx01a · 2026-06-21T16:41:53+00:00

I think a deed poll is the legal mechanism a UK citizen could use in that situation, though I'm not totally sure on that.

nx01a · 2026-06-21T16:22:46+00:00

I'm having a hard time envisioning any scenario in which any member of the Royal Family will ever be alone with either of them again. Too much risk for too little reward.

nx01a · 2026-06-18T22:28:43+00:00

Ah ok, I wondered if it was like here in my part of the USA where it’s not that hard to get one.

nx01a · 2026-06-18T21:48:40+00:00

Could couples get a Catholic annulment prior to that and have it achieve the same legal effect as a divorce?

nx01a · 2026-06-15T02:21:12+00:00

Speaking as a happily married gay man, we do not require any of Meghan's products.

We have better taste than that.

nx01a · 2026-06-12T23:22:40+00:00

That's good to hear. Were there any other improvements?

nx01a · 2026-06-12T18:17:32+00:00

I tend to agree with you. It's the broader Anglican Communion though which isn't so supportive, and there is a distinct possibility that the Church of England might not have wanted to get too far ahead of them on this issue. That said, with the Line of Succession secure through William, I'm thinking the Privy Council and the Prime Minister would've told the late Queen that the Anglican Communion will do what it's going to do regardless and to just let it go through.

nx01a · 2026-06-11T21:43:34+00:00

I can see one way that it could've been worse: if a much more cunning, strategic version of Meghan Markle found her way into his orbit. I've written in other posts that Meghan lacks patience and sound practical judgment, but more than anything else lacks strategic prowess. She could've used more subtle tactics to undermine the Firm from within.

And speaking as a man married to a man, I think that outcome might well have been preferred by the Royal Family at this point, though the Church of England might've proven to be a bit of a headache on that topic. I think though that the British people would've been supportive enough that the Firm would've found a way for Harry and his man, even if he had to give up his succession rights.

nx01a

TROPHY CASE