#duchess difficult

[robinisalwaysright]

Kindness costs nothing yet our greedy faux humanitarian duchess finds the price of kindness too steep for her.

[andiatas]

So... Harry will now for sure be this generation's Andrew & throw a public fit every five minute of "injustices" towards his children? I mean, I don't think anyone is surprised, we all kinda saw it coming, but for some reason I was still in denial & kind of hoped he would continue down his "being a royal is a burden, I don't wish that trauma on my children" route while his wife would be the one crying about how unfairly her children are being treated...

[grits-gal-raised-in-the-south]

Duchess Difficult on Page Six

Page Six doubles down via Ian Mohr & Mara Siegler to speak about rumors that Meghan Markle was dropped by WME talent agency. 🤔

Is this true? (Serena's) Jill Smoller (along with Brad Slater) is actually MM's agent. Jill is also allegedly godmother to an invisible. Wou

[robinisalwaysright]

[grits-gal-raised-in-the-south]

ENJOY: Duchess Difficult South Park Style

"Meghan Markle's Hilarious 'DUCHESS DIFFICULT' Roast!"

[andiatas]

To all of the Royal watching accounts, especially on Instagram, who are following & covering the two Californians faux-royal tour in Nigeria - why?

I'm so glad I don't have a Twitter account & am planning on taking a break from Instagram because this is just sad.

Yes, what those two have become & what they're currently doing in Nigeria is sad but what people fail to realise is that hate watching also leads to a career. The so-called "royal watchers" who are covering this trip are enabling the behaviour they're criticising & that is just as sad.

[andiatas]

I'm surprised no one with legal knowledge stopped them from register that URL

well i didn't do my research but as far as i know h&m made a website for their branding purpose but what's the relation from the legal aspect?

Now, I'm no lawyer, but...

They're not allowed to use their royal titles. Sure, one can say they're not doing that here, but from what I've seen, they're using every royal connection except for calling themselves His & Her Royal Highness.

I don't think East Sussex & West Sussex are too impressed by this. As you're saying, using the URL sussex dot com is a way to brand themselves. They're trying to connect the name Sussex to their name, but the thing is - it's already so tied to them, so what's the point? To me, it looks like someone grasping at one of the few straws they have left to appear like royalty. It's a grey area, but since the couple famously told Queen Elizabeth that she doesn't own the word royal, I think the people of East & West Sussex are now turning around being like, "You two don't own the name, Sussex."

Just like York has been champion to get rid of 'their Duke', so has Sussex. This point backs up my previous point in that I don't think 'the actual Sussex' is too impressed by this move. That being said, it's a tricky line to walk when introducing a law that makes it possible to strip someone of a title. I'm sure there are several examples of people throughout history who have done far worse things but have been allowed to keep their titles, so why should Harry & his wife get stripped of theirs just for publicly humiliating themselves & Harry's family? Instead of trying to justify why people are petitioning for this, I'm more interested in why the couple doesn't use their additional titles; surely three 'non-royal titles' are more impressive than just one? Why aren't they capitalising that they're also the Earl & Countess of Dumbarton plus Baron & Baroness Kilkeel? Or, if we look at it from another point of view, if you have a Duchy title, an Earldom title & a Barony title but choose to not use - & therefore not upset the people who are living in the named places - two of those three, why not drop using the third one as well?

[andiatas]

I'm guessing Sussex will intensify their work in trying to remove a certain title, or at least try to distance the actual Sussex from certain people & their actions