 |
| HRH The Duchess of Sussex. Bling a ding ding... |
Kensington
Palace has issued a stern warning on their Twitter page as to how Her
Majesty’s subjects may interact on their social media pages. It is
thought that, shall we say, less than fawning references to HRH the
Duchess of Sussex may have given rise to this move.
For
those unused to hearing her official title, that’s former
television actress, Meghan Markle. She of the steaming simulated
sex-romps in stationery cupboards, and come-and-get-me-boys underwear
shoots.
The
netizens of Britain are advised, on pain of exile – or at least of
a permanent block - not to “Promote discrimination based on race,
sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or age.”
Of
course, all the above really should go without saying, but (your
Royal Highness), whilst some may have stooped to base name-calling,
it’s not your skin tone that an increasing number of people find
distasteful; no, it is the obscenity of your out of control,
grotesque cash-splashing on clothes and ‘accoutrements’ when a
record number of people in this country are living hand-to-mouth. Not
yet a year ago, you sat by and allowed the homeless to be shovelled
off the streets for your wedding so as not to spoil the chocolate box
scene of you tiptoeing, Disney Princess-like, up the steps of St George's Chapel in a Givenchy gown that cost the price of a 3-bedroomed house
in the area you later visited to scratch crashingly cringey
‘affirmations’ on bananas in food parcels being prepared for
street-walking sex-workers.
You
decided to wear a £1,500 Oscar de la Renta silk chiffon number for
that outing.
Then
there was the £500,000k New York ‘baby shower’ you attended,
thrown for you by your chums, with the “most expensive hotel suite
in America” given over to you for your stay.
Correct
me if I am wrong, but generally speaking, aren’t baby showers (only
recently beginning to catch on over here) usually thrown for
expectant mothers who are likely to struggle to find the cash to buy
what they need for their new arrival?
That’s
clearly not the case for you, is it?
Oh
yes, we know. Mrs Clooney paid for you to fly over in an executive
jet. We’re all aware you didn’t pay for any of it yourself,
which, by extension, means we didn’t. I am sure we’re all
grateful for small mercies. Your friends, no doubt, have the same “if
you’ve got it, flaunt it” mindset you appear to have, so they
probably wouldn’t have understood if you had said: “thanks guys,
that’s so sweet, but the optics wouldn’t be good right now” -
but you could have soothed any hurt feelings by inviting them all
over for the christening party in a few weeks.
You
may even have been advised that such a trip at such a time might be
‘imprudent’, perhaps even by Amy Pickerill, who has since
resigned her post as your assistant. But you didn’t care. Bottom
line is you wanted to go, and “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” right?
For
an actress, your tone-deaf inability to read an audience is
staggering. It’s probably a good thing you decided to cut your
career short in favour of an advantageous marriage, because with that
level of disconnect, I can’t imagine we would have seen your
Shirley Valentine at the National any time soon.
You
decided to change horses and move on to a different job before you
slid into your forties and the sexy ingénue parts dried up. Good for
you. Trouble is, the job was to be a member of the British Royal
Family. It’s a highly privileged position with luxurious offices in
central London, but it’s a 24/7 job and it comes with
responsibilities. Perhaps you haven’t much experience of job-seeking, but when reading through the spec for a new role, it’s
usually a good idea to familiarise yourself with the ‘requirements’
before skipping ahead to the ‘benefits’.
Harry
should have told you. We’re not big on flashy displays of wealth
over here. We find it a bit “oh dear” and vulgar. It’s just not
the “done thing”. If he didn’t, then he’s failed in his duty
of care to you as his wife, and as someone with
a clearly different upbringing when it comes to money.
We
don’t like the smell of hypocrisy either, and someone sporting a
$350,000 Botswana diamond, and wearing £thousands worth of clothes,
shoes, and handbags, hand-wringing about women, the homeless, and the
disadvantaged is definitely a bit whiffy.
Take
a leaf out of your Grandmother-in-Law’s book. Look, we all know
she’s probably the wealthiest woman in the world, but she’s
definitely worn her Barbour more than once.
We
sort of like her for that.
 |
| HMQ at the Kennel Club's Cocker Spaniel Championship - 2018 |
©
Emmeline Wyndham - 2019
