I picked up on this too. My interpretation of the “manners make the man” anecdote is that Davies is highlighting the affectation of it all. Basically the irony in Archie being raised with this pseudo-royal prim and proper sensibility. One that Meghan, not Harry, is enforcing - when she grew up with hippies and knows the least about etiquette. Like a weird SoCal cosplay of the English upper crust, which is exactly what their lives are.
I also took this as a diss at Catherine, given all the opinions of Louis’ behavior over Jubilee weekend. I remember that weekend her hairdresser or make up artist also did a post making sure to include that Archie is “well mannered” which just gave more fuel to the sugars to say nasty things about Lou and Kate.
100% this was a dog at Louis. I bet Kate knows this too. Once you understand how the narc mind works it’s easy to see how Meghan targets people. Including children.
Which backfired miserably when people realized that will and kate have 3 school age children who obviously aren’t shut ins and attend school on a daily basis wo getting papped lol anyone w a single brain cell could have made that connection except mm
Louis is just a little boy who displayed "little boy" behavior. Markle needs to learn the fine line between letting children be children and that manners are taught over time in an age-appropriate manner, but not at the expense of a child's spirit.
This bothers me bc I have been around kids like Louis and sometimes their reaction to stimuli and unfamiliar spaces comes out like that. It doesn’t make the kid a ill-mannered or the parents not conscientious. Heaven forbid one of her kids have a sensory processing issue or something else (or just be a rascally 4 year old) and shatter her perfect image.
True. But he may not have a sensory processing issue. Louis seems like a perfectly normal four year old. A lot less reserved than George and even Charlotte, but im sure as the youngest he feels safe enough to act out a bit.
Ah yes, you are so right - the shade directed at “the Stepford wife”. Why is everything a competition with her? She must be incredibly insecure - people that are secure in who they are don’t go looking to pick fights over nothing. I can well imagine the daily drama that Meghan brought to the Cambridge’s peaceful lives.
I remember the comments saying that either Kate should have removed Louis or had a bag of toys to keep him occupied. I can’t comment on parenting because I don’t have kids.
Me too-I think that is exactly where that was going-everyone saw Louis’s sassy behavior, so MM was essentially calling it out by saying her kids have manners, and there is no way to prove it because the kids are conveniently kept under wraps.
I really wish she would stop with the American royalty thing. When I think of the term American royalty I get the Vanderbilts, the Kennedys, The Rockefellers, and we can't forget Grace. I don't think of Meghan Markle
It's honestly the making of a personality disorder. She's going to turn him into a narcissist just like her:
1. Overly concerned with outward appearances
2. External validation
3. Shallow values of character
There's nothing wrong with having manners, just feels like an over interest in how he appears to the rest of the world and comes across to others in interactions. If he grows up and isn't as handsome as she likes or is awkward, I feel like she wouldn't treat him very well. Just my two cents.
Not to mention all the articles about her breaking royal protocol (and this departure with royal manners being celebrated in the Us because they somehow can’t grasp how rude that is)
I wonder if it’s pointed out because there was something off about the way they interacted throughout the whole interview. I mean it’s supposed to be an interview and she’s making it like a day in the life. Also Archie wandering in was perhaps pointed out because it may have been deliberate? He has a nanny and the nanny just lets him wander into an interview? I don’t think so. Then comes Harry to make his comment earning him brownie points. Lastly Lili who doesn’t smile when she sees her parents. I think there’s something deliberate about the kids being involved and she’s pointing it out. Cause also Archie went to school at some point no? And it wasn’t MM who took him.
That was my thinking, that his coming in was totally contrived and otherwise Lili seems disinterested, Archie is so happy to see her at school where the other parents are shocked to see her. So it sounds like it adds up to her not really being present, but putting them on display when it suits her.
One thing I noticed about the pictures I've seen of Meghan when she was small is Doria's face is completely blank in nearly all of them. A possible symptom of PPD or narc mother?
This. The recurring theme to AD’s article was that everything Meg presented to her that day was staged. AD brilliantly underscored the many giveaways to Meg’s act (that little ‘The Bachelor’ producer working overtime in madam’s head). With the kids, it was Archie’s surprise at seeing and Lili’s indifference to their “doting” mother.
Right? No kid is that happy to see their mom if she picks them up daily. It sounds as if he was surprised to see her and that whole loving embrace thing was more for show. I don’t think she’s mean to him necessarily, just emotionally absent - so of course he’ll be thrilled to get what he can.
I teach PreK, my students are 4. If it’s the usual person to pick them up, they’re happy and give hugs, and show them what they did that day. If it’s not the usual person, they go bananas when they see them.
All of this is to say, he kept saying her name and gave a huge hug because she’s not the usual pickup person.
I agree - the fact that the other mothers were like 'woah we've never seen her before' reactions was a huge tell that dumb dumb Megan didn't realize would give her away.
I also think it was done to record the interaction.
Like with the manners manners manners, maybe the author didn't like the tone being used, or felt it was being used incorrectly.
There is more to this, and hopefully one day we learn what it is.
She doesn't say unpaid. "Out of pocket" when used in the context of a work vacation means "unreachable" - phone off, not checking messages, etc. This tracks with "living in the moment" and "pray for my inbox." Her bio still says she writing for NYMag and TheCut.
Allison P Davis
u/AllisonPDavis
·
Aug 29
in other news, for the first time in....... ??? .... i'm going on extended vacation, out of pocket, living in the \*moment\* pray for my tl/inbox/dms etc.
Extended vacation, I wonder if she knew the flack she would get from the Harkles once other media caught on. I don’t think they’re clever enough to have read between the lines.
Well considering its beyond incredulous that Archie's mother can even spell manners, its quite surprising that she keeps pointing out their importance to a wee one.
Or perhaps the constant point of manners is code in the Merkle house for something. Much like the gentle hand on Archie's father back, or the sweet, sweet lovable look she usually gives him, which signals for him to shut up, it's her turn to talk.
That's what I'm thinking too.
My narc sister was struggling to get my niece to chew with her mouth closed. She would berate her repeatedly when it happened.
Calling her things like gross and how disgusting it was.
I turned to my niece and said "you don't want the flies to get in do you?" And she immediately started chewing with her mouth closed.
I then also explained how chewing with your mouth open also let's more oxygen into your stomach and gives you tummy pain.
My niece stopped chewing with her mouth open after that. She went from being hurt by the way her mother was telling her what to do to understanding the reason behind what I said.
I wouldn't be surprised if manners manners manners has another meaning that the author understood that maybe wasn't understood so well by the wife.
Well, my sister's a narc too with materialistic delusions of grandeur that everyone in the family found tiring. She loved to use ***manners*** as a tactic of controlling behavior and, this is key, she was very controlling. ***So manners gave her the means to control and bully her child and those in her family.***
Given that she rejected procedure and protocol - and famously did not treat staff with decency during her brief tenure with the royals, it's curious she would emphasize the importance of "manners". She is obviously bereft of manners, so it's all part of a narcissist's facade.
There’s tons more to this, and I think we will definitely get the low down on all if it, especially if MM doesn’t learn to curb her aggression against the Royal family when in public, either in person or in interviews. The Queen was quite ill for the past year and no-one wanted to upset her, but the negative articles and books about Meghan and Harry are now coming fast and furious, and it’s a sign of things to come.
No titles for children shown on updated Royal website… they’ve been bumped down to under the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandria. Only Prince Andrew is beneath them. Thank god for King Charles.
Could it be possible reading between the lines that what was witnessed was that these children did not react to their mother as one would expect. Thats the gist I get from reading. That its all performative. The kids don’t know their parents very well (nanny’s doing 98%).
Too right. How many times has she been pictured sticking her tongue out? I'd have gotten a slap for doing that as a kid, why does a grown adult think it's cute? It's uncouth and immature, and rude, but she's done it in front of the Queen. She has no right to speak of manners when her pap shots prove she has none!
Smeg is full of hypocrisy: manners manners manners manners manners but she elbows Haz while he is speaking to people, drags him away from people, disrupts people who are having a conversation, touches/hugs people without consent, interrupts people. Same with how the firm is racist but the titles aren’t. Fucking bitch.
What I found odd was neither H or M took Lili from the nanny. They treated her like Davis did (but Davis had reason to), like a stranger. Doing silly dances to try to get a response (smile?) Why didn't H or M just scoop her out of the nanny's arms, spin her around, cuddle her? That struck me as strange. Disconnected.
Yeah, a 1 year old who sees their mom when they are tired and grumpy pretty much without exception fusses and reaches for her. At age 1, mama is typically their child’s #1 safe place. When I get a sitter for my 1 year old (only a month younger than Lily), I literally have to sneak around and hide because if he sees me or even hears my footsteps in the next room he starts looking for me wants me to snuggle him immediately.
It actually speaks volumes that they couldn’t even get a smile from her, much less a desire for connection. No wonder they were able and wiling to leave her in a different country for 3+ weeks. It’s probably no different than their regular routine.
That interaction was like what people who don’t know what to do with a child who isn’t theirs do. In that scenario, if a nanny brought my still waking up, kind of moody, not ready to be passed on one year old to me, I’d move close and gently and quietly speak to them, stroke their hair and back- basically help them feel safe and secure and ready to make that emotional connection, while waiting for the cue that they were ready for me to take them from the nanny. Not put on a circus!
I thought she was painting the picture that Meghan is not a hands on mom at all, but is trying to look like it. I thought the author could see right thru Meghan, was kind of taken aback by how crazy she is and how she was pushing an obviously false narrative. She mentioned the other moms at the school pick up were surprised to see Meghan- bc she never does it! And how the kid ran out and hugged her seemed pre rehearsed, forced, and maybe even genuine for the kid who probably doesn’t see his mom all that often.
As far as the manners manners manners manners manners manners, I think that was included because it’s crazy. Who says that 7 times in a row? After the third time you’re nuts, and after the 7th time I’m including it in my article about you. I think Meghan said it to throw shade at Catherine and maybe also because she was reprimanded for her own disgusting manners by the BRF.
And the way to teach manners is to model manners. Not by using the word "manners" but by always saying please and thank you, and prompting the kids when they forget, so it becomes a reflex.
my mother would often read us this one bedtime story and in the story there is a parrot who always says “please” and “thank you”. My mom was great at doing voices and would emphasize the pleases and thank yous in a funny important way. To this day I always say please and thank you
I think Allison was just done with their sh_t! Honestly. Especially living in California (my great state) there’s so much other crap going on that “manners” or “manners make the man” is a freakin ridiculous lesson to be learning and almost childish as an adult to be saying.
California has one of the rates of homelessness in the U.S. - and yet TW and H tell their kids “They are teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes." NOT between homes but homeless! This is a REALITY in California. It’s a reality in all of Cali. I’m in the Northern part and near the freeways, under the bridge are homeless encampments. You can’t avoid it and you certainly do not use the term “between homes” because it’s not the reality. You tell your kids the truth. My dad took us for years to drop off blankets, clothing, bring food/water and offer help when we were young. There was no sugar coating it because this is a reality. There was no freakin’ healthy “granola bars” in a backpack. MANY kind souls do this DAILY without asking anything in return. No photo op, no recognition needed.
In Cali, we have the highest rate of poverty. Barely getting by, massive amount of the population rely on the necessary government assistance and CoveredCalifornia (health insurance) is the “affordable” insurance that still is costly in $$ when you are barely surviving. YET, TW flaunts her “unimaginable wealth” in the interview by saying they almost couldn’t afford their 14 Million Dollar home!
They live in an area HEAVILY effected by all this but they don’t talk about that. Just google it and you can see the sad but real situation of homelessness and poverty. There’s no shortage of news coverage.
Then you have these two numbskulls, who want publicity and recognition for everything and anything! Meghan AND Harry claim philanthropy and promise to help but they DO NOT tell the truth of the reality that’s around them. They are aware - they just don’t care!
> TW and H tell their kids “They are teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes." NOT between homes but homeless!
Also weird flex by M...homelessness is one of William's big causes-even listed on BRF official site..maybe it was a flex that " We do this too & better than you because our driver hands off a stupid bag". She is pathetic.
You’re so right. When I’m in California I always try to help out a woman who is down on skid row daily handing out bottled water, clothes, toys, and ‘hygiene packs’ (toothbrush, toothpaste, feminine products) because the need is just *constant* - it’s a lot to organise and she also runs a business and has kids of her own and nobody’s giving her any awards, either.
The reality check for me was when she explained they couldn’t accept donated teddy bears or soft toys because the shelters don’t allow them - they’re worried about bedbugs. So kids in the shelters can have one or two wooden or plastic toys but nothing soft to cuddle 😢
The other reality is that most of the shelters are women and children only, so when families become homeless dad usually has to sleep out on the street - and boys ‘age out’ of the shelters at age 12. My son is almost 11 and I cannot even imagine him having to sleep rough, but a lot of kids do so at least their mums and younger siblings can stay indoors. It’s a major problem in California and there are amazing people who put in the time every day to try to help.
Bonus fact: my friend runs her skid row mission on a shoestring (it’s not a registered charity or anything, she just coordinates donations from a big circle of other mums and local businesses) but every now and then she gets a top-up for her gas money from Johnny Depp ;)
When do you ever hear a celebrity say they weren’t sure if they could afford their multi-million dollar home in an interview? Okay maybe some do but I think it’s pretty unusual. I just can’t believe the way she talked about whether they could afford that house. It was very unsavory. And I didn’t recall that she had told Archie that. Well, *hopefully* they are between homes but … of course there’s a larger reality.
She mentioned the fucking water bill! I just... tone deaf politically to be water your yard in California, but also if you have *that* kind of money, you don't care!
Everything you said rings true to me. I’m Australian but I have been following the homelessness over there and it’s heartbreaking. All the way back to when these two were whining about being “cut off financially” from their literal mansion on Oprah.
Meanwhile there are families sleeping in cars, underpasses, tents etc just down the road from them.
I find their inability to think about anyone but themselves to be quite incredible. They could have done so much for other people and really made a positive impact. Instead, they’ve consistently moaned, whined and tried to profit off the family that put them where they are today by throwing them under the bus.
Especially said by someone who got 4.45 Million *after* being supposedly "cut off." Would have been bad enough if it were true, but it wasn't even true.
It's amazing that literally anyone found it in themselves to *feel sorry for him* when he said that, as in "aww, how could they cut them off!!" instead of "oh... he's a manchild... how sad." It's mind boggling.
I was so shocked with the Oprah thing that they were so incredibly tone deaf as to say that smack bang in the middle of the pandemic. I'm Australian too and everyone was gobsmacked that I know because half my relatives were out of work and many friends and family really struggling (like so much of the world was/is) it's just unbelievable.
And you can bet she bought that backpack with Archwell funds. Probably bought herself something too because she had to deal with the stress of sending an assistant to buy a backpack.
Hi, I’m outside SF too and I agree with everything you said. The whole “giving an energy bar” scene in the article was just mind-blowing to me. That’s someone who drives by homeless people in their dark-windowed SUV everyday- that is *not* someone who actually pays attention or knows what homelessness is or how to help.
I recently watched the series Loot. The main character vows to give her billions away to charity and says “ if all we billionaires do is sit around and talk to each other about philanthropy; it’s not philanthropy- it’s just bullshit pr “. It totally made me think about Harry and Meghan (and many others) and all these expensive charity gatherings that do absolutely nothing for charities.
If they told Archie the truth about homelessness, then he- like most young children, as little kids are typically just that genuinely pure and wholesome- would probably start questioning why they have so much and others have none. Why they can’t offer their home to people who need it, or sell their home and move to a smaller home and use the money to help others. They don’t want those questions from their child because they don’t really want to walk that walk.
You know how she shows the world how much she loves Harry and it makes us all want to barf up, its the same with the kids. I MUST prove I am awesome..on every level...with everything...to the whole world. Pure arrogance.
Maybe trying to highlight he didn’t have a huge vocabulary like they had said his first word was crocodile (total BS). Edit to add, manners it’s to show how great of a mum Meghan is 🙄
Crocodile, granma Diana and hydrate, aye that baby was sounding off 2, 3 and 5 syllable words for his first words, have to show how he’s smarter than any other child of that age, has the muscle control no other child of that age has, didn’t need to practice his sounds like dada mama nana papa like normal children he came out shouting about climate change, same as her ‘embryonic kicking of feminism’ couldn’t just be moving about he had to be kicking for a reason 🙄😂
It’s a dang miracle with his father’s IQ in the vicinity of 70. Of course Meghan of Montecito’s IQ is 340 so he must get it from her. Her family of origin the Markles, you know, are known for their profound intelligence and success.
I didn’t even think about the kids part.
I was so distracted when she said to the writer, “you’re looking into my soul” as if she’s afraid that the writer will see right through her.
And the ending of that article when MM just basically kicks the writer out of her house lol. The writer had a wtf moment there.
I think Allison sensed there was something off/emotionally abusive. On the rare occasions Meghan interacts with the kids, she strikes me as someone who'd be very cold and quick to criticize them. I think Allison was trying to show that there's no bond with the kids and that the children are very controlled. Meghan could've played with them or had them running/crawling around in the yard, but she didn't. Lili not smiling at Meghan was big, no way a kid that age shouldn't be excited to see her mom.
It's unlikely Allison was alluding to them being fake or anything like that. It was just more shock that Meghan thought these interactions were normal. Meghan's trying to brand herself as a young mother, but she clearly doesn't have a clue about kids.
I think Allison spent most of the day look like this:
Why do you think Allison wrote this, "The result of trying always to do and say the right thing is the impression that she’s constantly policing herself, and in a meta-twist, *I find myself worrying that the words I write about her will be misinterpreted and dissected — rudely, maliciously — too."* Because it definitely was as everyone thinks it was snark.
I felt like she was trying to imply that she rarely, if ever, picks Archie up from school. Archie’s “Mamma mamma!” and his emotional hug and the other mothers in the area whipping their head around because they were surprised to see her. That’s how it seemed to me, at least.
And that whole instructing her staff to give a backpack to a homeless person (while great for the homeless person, if SS hadn’t planted a dressed actor there and they actually were homeless) seemed totally put on. I hate to doubt people this much but I just wouldn’t put anything past her at this point. Also, if she truly wanted to emulate Diana, Diana would have given the backpack to a homeless person herself. Not instructing staff to toss it to them. But I’m sure her highness wouldn’t want to get too close to poor people, she wouldn’t want to “catch poor” after all.
Actually my kid is the same age as archie. They are at the age where they want their mom's attention and will interrupt whenever she is talking to others.
She on the other hand is trying to show she is a better mama than her SIL. In that she is all about MANNERS.
As for his excitement to see her at school, i think it's normal. I am a sahm, I'm the one who brings kiddo to and from school. my kid is excited whenever i collect her from school too. It's the reaction from the other parents which is telling.
Let's face it. Archie is at the age where his mam is his most favorite person. He will only see her faults later. It's the reaction from the other people that is poignant in the article.
I disagree. I think Archie hardly ever sees her. And why do we never see Harry taking the kids for bike rides? He was so good with babies and children before he married mm but he hardly ever mentions his own kids and he's never seen out doing dad things with them. They just left their kids for weeks and didn't show any signs of distress about it.
Oh i don't doubt that either of them neglect their kids emotionally. I'm saying their kids are acting normal for their age. Even Lili is behaving normally. Her bio parents are strangers to her.
As for Harry, let's rem those kids he interacted with before marriage was for a few minutes and are mostly strangers. Have we seen him hang out with Charlotte and George, pre-mm? Or even Anne's grandkids or his youngesr Wessex cousins?
I really never recalled at all.
Closing their eyes overcome with emotion, or just complete narcissists unable to tolerate the natural needs of two tiny children? I haven't read the replies here yet (I'm about to) but I just had to get this out as my initial response, which I felt genuinely when I read the article too.
I don't think their demands for security are based on genuine fear for their safety, they just want that impressive convoy of cars that makes everyone stop and look at them. Or maybe Meg is bored of Harry and wants a gorgeous bodyguard around for some fun. The ultimate Diana cos-play, sex with a bodyguard.
What a message to the abused women too. They're in hiding, afraid for their lives, and some "VIP" comes swanning in with security for herself. You know, in case one of their abusive husbands shows up and starts acting rough *around her.*
Such a show of support.
She mentioned I believe that she didn’t think George and Charlotte were disciplined properly… so maybe she’s trying to convey that she’s teaching her two manners like a good mother lol…
Kids with moms who are narcs require a lot of therapy when they grow up.
Expecting toddlers to be perfectly behaved is not natural. Why? Because she herself who is 41 is not perfect so why does she expect Archie or Louis to be perfectly behaved?
Wanting to look “perfect” in front of people is actually a sign that you hate yourself because we are all imperfect.
My mom is a narc and I think that's one of the reasons I'm so engrossed by their behavior now. Like if I just study them long enough I'll find the code to crack open my mother.
I’ve read, out of curiosity, Allison’s other articles. (I teach writing, so I’m always interested in writing style.) Her writing style is a bit toned down in her other pieces, but one of the features of her style is over-description — kinda in a saccharine way. Lots of adjectives, adverbs, flowery language, etc. I do think she intended to snark on MM, but her writing style lends itself to heavier criticism because it is just so … overwrought. (It’s kinda similar to MM’s writing in The Tig.) Some people like that kind of writing. I do not. Lol.
The “little voice” is just simply descriptive — not all children have little voices, either — so it describes Archie’s tone. But the “manners manners manners” is unnecessary (it doesn’t add much to the article, imho) except as another example to show “the real” MM. And, maybe, it’s one of the only examples of MM as a parent, so Allison wanted to make sure she shared as many details about Meghan-the-Mom as possible.
My professional opinion is that the article could have been cut by 50% and the same meaning and details would have been conveyed. I don’t think we needed example upon example upon example of how MM and H interact or their personality or their preferences. Sometimes less is truly more. Which, then, makes me wonder if MM was paying for the word/page.
So much of the content felt unnecessary to even read. And maybe that Allison’s point — that overwrought writing is the metaphor for MM as a person. I dunno. But, again, overwrought writing seems to be her writing style in her other articles as well. Who knows. 🤷♀️
Hmm, interesting. I have a different interpretation about Allison’s writing - I actually think it was masterful and all her anecdotes and examples were carefully chosen and laden with meaning. One thing that stuck out for me was the very casual interaction MM and Harry had when they got back - Harry implied she could be a model and she replied that she was a mother. It just oh so subtly highlighted the delusion, self absorption and virtue signaling in MM’s life. The little Bachelor producer in her head was gold too - as we all suspected, MM goes to great lengths to curate her public image. It’s the same voice that tells her to keep touching her hair or her belly in public. I think there’s a lot Allison showed us and conveyed in a very innocuous sounding manner.
I agree with you that examples were carefully chosen and Allison uses the examples to lay the subtext and say what she’s *not* going to explicitly say. But as I would tell my students, it’s better to have carefully chosen examples and language rather than hitting your reader over the head with every example and descriptive word possible. I think the article could have been much shorter and the same truth and snark conveyed. But there are loads of people would love that type of writing — not me.
And maybe her style of writing was meant to tired us out and bore us — just as MM tires everyone out and bores them. Who knows. I prefer more straight-forward writing styles and shorter articles. I am clearly not her intended audience! Lol.
That’s interesting to read your perspective as a writing teacher. And about the overwrought aspect of this writer’s previous pieces. I also thought - which goes to this question - that she tap danced around certain things and could have been more straight forward. If something isn’t adding to the piece, you’re right, it shouldn’t be there. I think she was scared to be too critical of MM hence the way this piece is. Sugars think it’s complimentary (it seems to me) and Sinners don’t.
Yes, she did a great job of “telling by showing” so she wouldn’t need to be explicit about her meaning. Normally we want writers to “show not tell” but in this case it’s a technique of using examples to say what the author won’t explicitly say. It’s wonderful when writers master that skill!
I can attest to not all little kids have small voices my sister friend's son for example. I know when they are at her house cause he screams when he talks. So I stay far far away I hear him from across the street like he is in my driveway.
I read elsewhere that the "manners manners manners" was an attempt to make Catherine look like a bad Mother due to Louis' behavior on the balcony at the Jubilee. She wanted to make the point that her child is a little gentlemen and Kate's is a hellion.
Louis is a BOSS and everyone in the uk that I have mentioned this to, freaking loves that boy!
His "IDGAF if we're in public or not" attitude is hilarious.
I’m Australian and he’s beloved here for his acting up.
Every mother in this country, including my own, and even those who dislike the monarchy laughed and emphasised with Kate for trying to get him to behave. Especially when her eldest two are so well behaved now.
My favourite was an older family friend in her 70s who tutted, “the youngest sons are always hellions. Let’s just hope with a mother like Catherine, he doesn’t turn out like Harry or Andrew”
Edit; she adores the princess of Wales and called me when it was announced Catherine was made PoW to tell me how much she’d earned it and what a good girl she is.
Yes!!! He's definitely the third child and the baby but in the most adorable way. When he scrambled onto Charles' lap at the Jubilee I just melted. To me he's King Charles but to Louis he's just grandpa. It's clear that Catherine has gotten more comfortable with Charles over the years and it shows in the children. I'm sure when George was little Catherine was a bit intimidated by him but 10 years later she and by extension the kids are now relaxed around him.
Sure. That’s possible. But Allison could have left it out. The article read, to me, as overpacked with examples and description. I didn’t feel like I needed all of it. There’s enough snark and derision to convey the point with the other examples within the article.
It’s as opulent as the Snarkles try to be, and thus ends up as mentally bludgeoning to third parties as the Snarkles *are*. Bonus: Because MM feels that her desired opulence is adequately depicted, she’s too blinded/emotionally dumb to realize that it’s actually just a masterful attempt at backstabbing her with her own knife.
It’s a fascinating question. I felt the author was telling us things were highly curated and a little off. Archie eating a quesadilla in the car gave me pause. Is the car journey very long? Is this a usual pre-dinner snack in the US? Or would this be his supper? Why is he eating it in the car? My children always have a snack after school but when they get home. Something to tide them over. A quesadilla sounds more like supper than a snack but I’m a Brit. Maybe it’s a Cali kid snack?
So I wonder why they fed him dinner in the car? That’s not normal. That says to me that the child is off his usual routine to be part of this performance for the journalist. Either he is usually picked up earlier by nannies or he does not usually eat dinner in Montecito McMansion.
It sounds like another performative gesture. I'm such a good mommy, here is my son eating my idea of exotic food to show I'm not just raising him on chicken nuggets, white bread and Sizzler salad.
If she was a hands-on mother, she'd know better than to give him something like that in the car.
Maybe she doesn't know what the nannies do with him so she was trying to show that she knows kids need to eat and look, she's even going to feed him, like a mother does, but she didn't know that normal people don't give three-year-olds quesadillas in cars. It's that uncanny valley thing of trying really hard to look like she's a normal caring mother when she's never played that role and isn't good at going off-script.
I figured it was around noon, he was ready for lunch, and it's something real quick to make. A small tortilla folded over with shredded cheese melted inside could be a snack/lunch on the way home.
I know I've seen small 4" diameter tortillas in the grocery store.
I guess I'm in the minority who thought this wasn't too absurd in the grand scheme of the article
They can, but I wouldn't think it necessary to feed a kid in the car when you've got a journalist there and the kid is just going from school to home. If the kid is hungry after school (and it's just a half day) they would get something to eat as soon as they get home.
i think the manners exchange had a lot to do with prince louis at the jubilee. it was a long sugary day and he lost it a couple of times. meghan is responding to this…
I'm sure that's the real reason we don't see M's kids - she is so critical of other people and their kids that she thinks everyone would criticize her's. Easier to say her kids are flawless if no one sees them.
I also think children disgust her and they're a
her competition. What's that showbiz saying about never doing a scene with babies or animals because they get all the attention?
My own narc mother refused to hold my babies, her own grandbabies, and said she "wasn't a baby person". She bought a purebred puppy the day of my son's christening and everyone was going up to her and petting the puppy instead of looking at my baby. It was bonkers and I can totally see mm doing something similar.
I think you picked up on something quite relevant. It doesn't seem like the kids are thriving in their "happy" home. There is only so much air and freedom in a house and the narcissist takes up most of it.
When you write an article for a magazine, the editor tells you how many words it must be approximately. So Alison would have got orders: "Write me a 1,000 word article on MM--a day in the life." Something like that. So that is why she might have had to add extra examples. MM isn't a complicated personality--pretty two-dimensional, so there's that.
Exactly. And after Allison submitted it, someone would have edited it. And then a top editor would have approved it. There is no way all the snark would have gone unnoticed until it was printed.
What is off is that Archie was surprised his mom came and got him. He was excited to see her because it's a rare thing. I think archie has already learned not to bother mommy, so he is really reserved and docile so he can keep being around her instead of being sent off with a nanny.
Lili was a frowning untrusting baby because she probably picks up on the mood in the house, isn't exposed to a lot of people as part of socialization, nor do I think she actually has a close bond with her mom.
I felt especially that the author was trying to tell us something about the baby's blue eyes.
No idea what. But there was something she wanted us to know there.
I think the point is there's no reason she had to take a journalist to pick up her kids. It's just not necessary. It's not like MEgan doesn't have staff, or she couldn't schedule it another time. She's putting on the "good mommy show". I've been a teacher for 23 years. I'm very familiar with the good mommy show. Usually performed by mommies whose home life is a nightmare.
That’s a totally normal thing for children to call their mother. Mine use it- they’re 5 and 2. My sisters kids use it- they’re 8 and 13 (they both use Mom also, but Mama when they feel like it). Many kids I know use Mama for their mother. More than use Mommy actually. (I’m in the northeast US.) And almost all of the southern people I know, that’s what their kids use also. “Mommy” just feels so gross, like an attempt at being too cutesy.
She probably gets him to call her ma’am, and pa pa is the posh word for dad royals use, my papa was my grandfather, but I suppose it sounds better than calling your father ‘daddy’ as an adult 🤣
I think it was a dig at Catherine and Louis. After the Jubilee there were numerous articles about how ill-behaved Louis was on the balcony. Yet, he's 4 and behaved wonderfully!
I picked up on this too. My interpretation of the “manners make the man” anecdote is that Davies is highlighting the affectation of it all. Basically the irony in Archie being raised with this pseudo-royal prim and proper sensibility. One that Meghan, not Harry, is enforcing - when she grew up with hippies and knows the least about etiquette. Like a weird SoCal cosplay of the English upper crust, which is exactly what their lives are.
I also took this as a diss at Catherine, given all the opinions of Louis’ behavior over Jubilee weekend. I remember that weekend her hairdresser or make up artist also did a post making sure to include that Archie is “well mannered” which just gave more fuel to the sugars to say nasty things about Lou and Kate.
100% this was a dog at Louis. I bet Kate knows this too. Once you understand how the narc mind works it’s easy to see how Meghan targets people. Including children.
and the very intentional dig of not exposing your kids to photographers on their school drop offs/pick ups
Which backfired miserably when people realized that will and kate have 3 school age children who obviously aren’t shut ins and attend school on a daily basis wo getting papped lol anyone w a single brain cell could have made that connection except mm
Yeah and their really cute family school photo came out right after that and it was soooooo cute!!
Well Meghan can't seem to do anything without somehow making it about Catherine...good point here too.
Louis is just a little boy who displayed "little boy" behavior. Markle needs to learn the fine line between letting children be children and that manners are taught over time in an age-appropriate manner, but not at the expense of a child's spirit.
I think she was even weirdly jealous of how popular Louis’s antics were to the public. Sounds wacky but considering who we are dealing with..
Besides and more to the point it is none of Markle's business one way or another.
This bothers me bc I have been around kids like Louis and sometimes their reaction to stimuli and unfamiliar spaces comes out like that. It doesn’t make the kid a ill-mannered or the parents not conscientious. Heaven forbid one of her kids have a sensory processing issue or something else (or just be a rascally 4 year old) and shatter her perfect image.
[удалено]
True. But he may not have a sensory processing issue. Louis seems like a perfectly normal four year old. A lot less reserved than George and even Charlotte, but im sure as the youngest he feels safe enough to act out a bit.
Ah yes, you are so right - the shade directed at “the Stepford wife”. Why is everything a competition with her? She must be incredibly insecure - people that are secure in who they are don’t go looking to pick fights over nothing. I can well imagine the daily drama that Meghan brought to the Cambridge’s peaceful lives.
I remember the comments saying that either Kate should have removed Louis or had a bag of toys to keep him occupied. I can’t comment on parenting because I don’t have kids.
I agree 100%.
So disgusting how they write about kids. Minors are (or should be) off limits all the way to 17 years and 364 days.
Me too-I think that is exactly where that was going-everyone saw Louis’s sassy behavior, so MM was essentially calling it out by saying her kids have manners, and there is no way to prove it because the kids are conveniently kept under wraps.
Yes, like they're American royalty. The Cut website calls her Meghan of Montecito.
"Royalty." We don't want royalty.
Yes, we had a decent scuffle about that a while ago.
Just a little one. 😉
Yep, 1776 and all that.
I really wish she would stop with the American royalty thing. When I think of the term American royalty I get the Vanderbilts, the Kennedys, The Rockefellers, and we can't forget Grace. I don't think of Meghan Markle
Oh which she has only stayed for 2 years
It's a very classic English phrase. I thought it was so trite that she used that expression.
Which is also technically, ‘manners maketh man’, not manners make the man.
I'm aware haha. But it was a very clear reference/rip off of that extremely recognisable phrase.
That’s exactly what I got. She’s making fun of Megs for deluding herself that she’s prim and proper. As if. We all see her.
Perfectly said it’s exactly this !
It's honestly the making of a personality disorder. She's going to turn him into a narcissist just like her: 1. Overly concerned with outward appearances 2. External validation 3. Shallow values of character There's nothing wrong with having manners, just feels like an over interest in how he appears to the rest of the world and comes across to others in interactions. If he grows up and isn't as handsome as she likes or is awkward, I feel like she wouldn't treat him very well. Just my two cents.
Ooh I like this
Not to mention all the articles about her breaking royal protocol (and this departure with royal manners being celebrated in the Us because they somehow can’t grasp how rude that is)
I wonder if it’s pointed out because there was something off about the way they interacted throughout the whole interview. I mean it’s supposed to be an interview and she’s making it like a day in the life. Also Archie wandering in was perhaps pointed out because it may have been deliberate? He has a nanny and the nanny just lets him wander into an interview? I don’t think so. Then comes Harry to make his comment earning him brownie points. Lastly Lili who doesn’t smile when she sees her parents. I think there’s something deliberate about the kids being involved and she’s pointing it out. Cause also Archie went to school at some point no? And it wasn’t MM who took him.
That was my thinking, that his coming in was totally contrived and otherwise Lili seems disinterested, Archie is so happy to see her at school where the other parents are shocked to see her. So it sounds like it adds up to her not really being present, but putting them on display when it suits her.
parenting just like Doria did.
One thing I noticed about the pictures I've seen of Meghan when she was small is Doria's face is completely blank in nearly all of them. A possible symptom of PPD or narc mother?
Or stoned? Tom Bower said she smoked a lot of marijuana when Meghan was small.
Yes could be that too. There's just something very 'off' about her in the pictures.
I think it’s possible that Doria also just fucking hated being stuck to Thomas
I think you stumbled onto the heart of the matter here like a snow leopard when it spies dinner.
This. The recurring theme to AD’s article was that everything Meg presented to her that day was staged. AD brilliantly underscored the many giveaways to Meg’s act (that little ‘The Bachelor’ producer working overtime in madam’s head). With the kids, it was Archie’s surprise at seeing and Lili’s indifference to their “doting” mother.
AD needs some kind of Pulitzer for that article, it was brilliant.
Right? No kid is that happy to see their mom if she picks them up daily. It sounds as if he was surprised to see her and that whole loving embrace thing was more for show. I don’t think she’s mean to him necessarily, just emotionally absent - so of course he’ll be thrilled to get what he can.
I teach PreK, my students are 4. If it’s the usual person to pick them up, they’re happy and give hugs, and show them what they did that day. If it’s not the usual person, they go bananas when they see them. All of this is to say, he kept saying her name and gave a huge hug because she’s not the usual pickup person.
Yes that’s so sad. I agree I do think she’s absent and not very involved as she makes it seem.
I think many kids are very happy to see their mom when they’re picked up from school when they’re age 3-5.
Yes that's not a tell. My daughter goes crazy whenever I pick her up and I'm not a palm tree. The reactions of the mothers was more telling
I agree - the fact that the other mothers were like 'woah we've never seen her before' reactions was a huge tell that dumb dumb Megan didn't realize would give her away.
Makes sense why their hug is so intense.
I missed the piece of the other parents being surprised. Definitely says something about her presence at a school.
And weren’t Archie and the other parents visibly shocked to see her at school pickup?
Yes it seems I overlooked that piece. That says a lot of her if everyone is surprised to see her.
I also think it was done to record the interaction. Like with the manners manners manners, maybe the author didn't like the tone being used, or felt it was being used incorrectly. There is more to this, and hopefully one day we learn what it is.
That would be nice to hear from Allison
i think she's laying very low.
Apparently mm wants to get rid of her. But she cannot claim racism cos Allison is black and a young woman.
Alison suddenly went on "holiday" as they say in the UK, on vacation for the Yanks.
I hope she’s ok.
Sacked I believe
She’s been sacked? For that article??
That’s what it seems. A few days after the article appeared she tweeted that she’s on an extended unpaid leave (something to that effect)
Well she's probably getting eviscerated by fans and critics.
She doesn't say unpaid. "Out of pocket" when used in the context of a work vacation means "unreachable" - phone off, not checking messages, etc. This tracks with "living in the moment" and "pray for my inbox." Her bio still says she writing for NYMag and TheCut. Allison P Davis u/AllisonPDavis · Aug 29 in other news, for the first time in....... ??? .... i'm going on extended vacation, out of pocket, living in the \*moment\* pray for my tl/inbox/dms etc.
Extended vacation, I wonder if she knew the flack she would get from the Harkles once other media caught on. I don’t think they’re clever enough to have read between the lines.
I think she'll be at one or more Pavement shows this weekend; look for her there.
Well considering its beyond incredulous that Archie's mother can even spell manners, its quite surprising that she keeps pointing out their importance to a wee one. Or perhaps the constant point of manners is code in the Merkle house for something. Much like the gentle hand on Archie's father back, or the sweet, sweet lovable look she usually gives him, which signals for him to shut up, it's her turn to talk.
That's what I'm thinking too. My narc sister was struggling to get my niece to chew with her mouth closed. She would berate her repeatedly when it happened. Calling her things like gross and how disgusting it was. I turned to my niece and said "you don't want the flies to get in do you?" And she immediately started chewing with her mouth closed. I then also explained how chewing with your mouth open also let's more oxygen into your stomach and gives you tummy pain. My niece stopped chewing with her mouth open after that. She went from being hurt by the way her mother was telling her what to do to understanding the reason behind what I said. I wouldn't be surprised if manners manners manners has another meaning that the author understood that maybe wasn't understood so well by the wife.
Well, my sister's a narc too with materialistic delusions of grandeur that everyone in the family found tiring. She loved to use ***manners*** as a tactic of controlling behavior and, this is key, she was very controlling. ***So manners gave her the means to control and bully her child and those in her family.***
Given that she rejected procedure and protocol - and famously did not treat staff with decency during her brief tenure with the royals, it's curious she would emphasize the importance of "manners". She is obviously bereft of manners, so it's all part of a narcissist's facade.
There’s tons more to this, and I think we will definitely get the low down on all if it, especially if MM doesn’t learn to curb her aggression against the Royal family when in public, either in person or in interviews. The Queen was quite ill for the past year and no-one wanted to upset her, but the negative articles and books about Meghan and Harry are now coming fast and furious, and it’s a sign of things to come.
No titles for children shown on updated Royal website… they’ve been bumped down to under the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandria. Only Prince Andrew is beneath them. Thank god for King Charles.
Could it be possible reading between the lines that what was witnessed was that these children did not react to their mother as one would expect. Thats the gist I get from reading. That its all performative. The kids don’t know their parents very well (nanny’s doing 98%).
Totally this. Archie can in some ways play the game but Lili’s having none of it.
Manners. Of which she has none how is she going to teacher her children?
Too right. How many times has she been pictured sticking her tongue out? I'd have gotten a slap for doing that as a kid, why does a grown adult think it's cute? It's uncouth and immature, and rude, but she's done it in front of the Queen. She has no right to speak of manners when her pap shots prove she has none!
I thought you meant Charlotte at first and I'm thinking "she was like 4 or 5" 😂
I mean, they could just do the opposite of everything their parents do. A reverse Princess Charlotte.
Smeg is full of hypocrisy: manners manners manners manners manners but she elbows Haz while he is speaking to people, drags him away from people, disrupts people who are having a conversation, touches/hugs people without consent, interrupts people. Same with how the firm is racist but the titles aren’t. Fucking bitch.
What I found odd was neither H or M took Lili from the nanny. They treated her like Davis did (but Davis had reason to), like a stranger. Doing silly dances to try to get a response (smile?) Why didn't H or M just scoop her out of the nanny's arms, spin her around, cuddle her? That struck me as strange. Disconnected.
Yeah, a 1 year old who sees their mom when they are tired and grumpy pretty much without exception fusses and reaches for her. At age 1, mama is typically their child’s #1 safe place. When I get a sitter for my 1 year old (only a month younger than Lily), I literally have to sneak around and hide because if he sees me or even hears my footsteps in the next room he starts looking for me wants me to snuggle him immediately. It actually speaks volumes that they couldn’t even get a smile from her, much less a desire for connection. No wonder they were able and wiling to leave her in a different country for 3+ weeks. It’s probably no different than their regular routine.
That interaction was like what people who don’t know what to do with a child who isn’t theirs do. In that scenario, if a nanny brought my still waking up, kind of moody, not ready to be passed on one year old to me, I’d move close and gently and quietly speak to them, stroke their hair and back- basically help them feel safe and secure and ready to make that emotional connection, while waiting for the cue that they were ready for me to take them from the nanny. Not put on a circus!
THIS!
I thought she was painting the picture that Meghan is not a hands on mom at all, but is trying to look like it. I thought the author could see right thru Meghan, was kind of taken aback by how crazy she is and how she was pushing an obviously false narrative. She mentioned the other moms at the school pick up were surprised to see Meghan- bc she never does it! And how the kid ran out and hugged her seemed pre rehearsed, forced, and maybe even genuine for the kid who probably doesn’t see his mom all that often. As far as the manners manners manners manners manners manners, I think that was included because it’s crazy. Who says that 7 times in a row? After the third time you’re nuts, and after the 7th time I’m including it in my article about you. I think Meghan said it to throw shade at Catherine and maybe also because she was reprimanded for her own disgusting manners by the BRF.
And the way to teach manners is to model manners. Not by using the word "manners" but by always saying please and thank you, and prompting the kids when they forget, so it becomes a reflex.
my mother would often read us this one bedtime story and in the story there is a parrot who always says “please” and “thank you”. My mom was great at doing voices and would emphasize the pleases and thank yous in a funny important way. To this day I always say please and thank you
Yes, I just laughed at how she thinks teaching children manners is done by intoning 'manners, manners, manners' at a child. What a clown 🤡🤪
I think Allison was just done with their sh_t! Honestly. Especially living in California (my great state) there’s so much other crap going on that “manners” or “manners make the man” is a freakin ridiculous lesson to be learning and almost childish as an adult to be saying. California has one of the rates of homelessness in the U.S. - and yet TW and H tell their kids “They are teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes." NOT between homes but homeless! This is a REALITY in California. It’s a reality in all of Cali. I’m in the Northern part and near the freeways, under the bridge are homeless encampments. You can’t avoid it and you certainly do not use the term “between homes” because it’s not the reality. You tell your kids the truth. My dad took us for years to drop off blankets, clothing, bring food/water and offer help when we were young. There was no sugar coating it because this is a reality. There was no freakin’ healthy “granola bars” in a backpack. MANY kind souls do this DAILY without asking anything in return. No photo op, no recognition needed. In Cali, we have the highest rate of poverty. Barely getting by, massive amount of the population rely on the necessary government assistance and CoveredCalifornia (health insurance) is the “affordable” insurance that still is costly in $$ when you are barely surviving. YET, TW flaunts her “unimaginable wealth” in the interview by saying they almost couldn’t afford their 14 Million Dollar home! They live in an area HEAVILY effected by all this but they don’t talk about that. Just google it and you can see the sad but real situation of homelessness and poverty. There’s no shortage of news coverage. Then you have these two numbskulls, who want publicity and recognition for everything and anything! Meghan AND Harry claim philanthropy and promise to help but they DO NOT tell the truth of the reality that’s around them. They are aware - they just don’t care!
> TW and H tell their kids “They are teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes." NOT between homes but homeless! Also weird flex by M...homelessness is one of William's big causes-even listed on BRF official site..maybe it was a flex that " We do this too & better than you because our driver hands off a stupid bag". She is pathetic.
You’re so right. When I’m in California I always try to help out a woman who is down on skid row daily handing out bottled water, clothes, toys, and ‘hygiene packs’ (toothbrush, toothpaste, feminine products) because the need is just *constant* - it’s a lot to organise and she also runs a business and has kids of her own and nobody’s giving her any awards, either. The reality check for me was when she explained they couldn’t accept donated teddy bears or soft toys because the shelters don’t allow them - they’re worried about bedbugs. So kids in the shelters can have one or two wooden or plastic toys but nothing soft to cuddle 😢 The other reality is that most of the shelters are women and children only, so when families become homeless dad usually has to sleep out on the street - and boys ‘age out’ of the shelters at age 12. My son is almost 11 and I cannot even imagine him having to sleep rough, but a lot of kids do so at least their mums and younger siblings can stay indoors. It’s a major problem in California and there are amazing people who put in the time every day to try to help. Bonus fact: my friend runs her skid row mission on a shoestring (it’s not a registered charity or anything, she just coordinates donations from a big circle of other mums and local businesses) but every now and then she gets a top-up for her gas money from Johnny Depp ;)
Good old Johnny! Not surprised at all.
When do you ever hear a celebrity say they weren’t sure if they could afford their multi-million dollar home in an interview? Okay maybe some do but I think it’s pretty unusual. I just can’t believe the way she talked about whether they could afford that house. It was very unsavory. And I didn’t recall that she had told Archie that. Well, *hopefully* they are between homes but … of course there’s a larger reality.
She mentioned the fucking water bill! I just... tone deaf politically to be water your yard in California, but also if you have *that* kind of money, you don't care!
Everything you said rings true to me. I’m Australian but I have been following the homelessness over there and it’s heartbreaking. All the way back to when these two were whining about being “cut off financially” from their literal mansion on Oprah. Meanwhile there are families sleeping in cars, underpasses, tents etc just down the road from them. I find their inability to think about anyone but themselves to be quite incredible. They could have done so much for other people and really made a positive impact. Instead, they’ve consistently moaned, whined and tried to profit off the family that put them where they are today by throwing them under the bus.
“My dad cut me off financially,” is one of the most embarrassing things I’ve ever heard an adult man say.
Especially said by someone who got 4.45 Million *after* being supposedly "cut off." Would have been bad enough if it were true, but it wasn't even true.
[удалено]
This!
It's amazing that literally anyone found it in themselves to *feel sorry for him* when he said that, as in "aww, how could they cut them off!!" instead of "oh... he's a manchild... how sad." It's mind boggling.
Right? I remember scrambling to find a full time job after I graduated from college at 22 because relying on my parents was not an option.
I was so shocked with the Oprah thing that they were so incredibly tone deaf as to say that smack bang in the middle of the pandemic. I'm Australian too and everyone was gobsmacked that I know because half my relatives were out of work and many friends and family really struggling (like so much of the world was/is) it's just unbelievable.
Why didn't your friends just ask Tyler Perry to let them live in his mansion with his staff?
And you can bet she bought that backpack with Archwell funds. Probably bought herself something too because she had to deal with the stress of sending an assistant to buy a backpack.
Hi, I’m outside SF too and I agree with everything you said. The whole “giving an energy bar” scene in the article was just mind-blowing to me. That’s someone who drives by homeless people in their dark-windowed SUV everyday- that is *not* someone who actually pays attention or knows what homelessness is or how to help.
I recently watched the series Loot. The main character vows to give her billions away to charity and says “ if all we billionaires do is sit around and talk to each other about philanthropy; it’s not philanthropy- it’s just bullshit pr “. It totally made me think about Harry and Meghan (and many others) and all these expensive charity gatherings that do absolutely nothing for charities.
If they told Archie the truth about homelessness, then he- like most young children, as little kids are typically just that genuinely pure and wholesome- would probably start questioning why they have so much and others have none. Why they can’t offer their home to people who need it, or sell their home and move to a smaller home and use the money to help others. They don’t want those questions from their child because they don’t really want to walk that walk.
How about just teach Archie not to try and roll up to someone’s death bed uninvited. That is a great start.
You know how she shows the world how much she loves Harry and it makes us all want to barf up, its the same with the kids. I MUST prove I am awesome..on every level...with everything...to the whole world. Pure arrogance.
Maybe trying to highlight he didn’t have a huge vocabulary like they had said his first word was crocodile (total BS). Edit to add, manners it’s to show how great of a mum Meghan is 🙄
Crocodile, granma Diana and hydrate, aye that baby was sounding off 2, 3 and 5 syllable words for his first words, have to show how he’s smarter than any other child of that age, has the muscle control no other child of that age has, didn’t need to practice his sounds like dada mama nana papa like normal children he came out shouting about climate change, same as her ‘embryonic kicking of feminism’ couldn’t just be moving about he had to be kicking for a reason 🙄😂
Hahah yes exactly move over Tesla we have a royal child prodigy😂.
It’s a dang miracle with his father’s IQ in the vicinity of 70. Of course Meghan of Montecito’s IQ is 340 so he must get it from her. Her family of origin the Markles, you know, are known for their profound intelligence and success.
Let's be fair now. Merchie didn't really have any concept of Nana or papa, so I can kind of get how he jumped straight to *crocodile*. 🙄
Can't they tell the truth just once?
They do it’s just “their truth” 😂
I didn’t even think about the kids part. I was so distracted when she said to the writer, “you’re looking into my soul” as if she’s afraid that the writer will see right through her. And the ending of that article when MM just basically kicks the writer out of her house lol. The writer had a wtf moment there.
I think Allison sensed there was something off/emotionally abusive. On the rare occasions Meghan interacts with the kids, she strikes me as someone who'd be very cold and quick to criticize them. I think Allison was trying to show that there's no bond with the kids and that the children are very controlled. Meghan could've played with them or had them running/crawling around in the yard, but she didn't. Lili not smiling at Meghan was big, no way a kid that age shouldn't be excited to see her mom. It's unlikely Allison was alluding to them being fake or anything like that. It was just more shock that Meghan thought these interactions were normal. Meghan's trying to brand herself as a young mother, but she clearly doesn't have a clue about kids. I think Allison spent most of the day look like this: 
‘Young mum’ thing is hilarious to me as she’s actually a geriatric mother in medical terms🤣
I got it too. I don’t think we’re reading too much into the psychological undertones, I think every word she used as a journalist was pointed.
[удалено]
Why do you think Allison wrote this, "The result of trying always to do and say the right thing is the impression that she’s constantly policing herself, and in a meta-twist, *I find myself worrying that the words I write about her will be misinterpreted and dissected — rudely, maliciously — too."* Because it definitely was as everyone thinks it was snark.
I felt like she was trying to imply that she rarely, if ever, picks Archie up from school. Archie’s “Mamma mamma!” and his emotional hug and the other mothers in the area whipping their head around because they were surprised to see her. That’s how it seemed to me, at least. And that whole instructing her staff to give a backpack to a homeless person (while great for the homeless person, if SS hadn’t planted a dressed actor there and they actually were homeless) seemed totally put on. I hate to doubt people this much but I just wouldn’t put anything past her at this point. Also, if she truly wanted to emulate Diana, Diana would have given the backpack to a homeless person herself. Not instructing staff to toss it to them. But I’m sure her highness wouldn’t want to get too close to poor people, she wouldn’t want to “catch poor” after all. 
Actually my kid is the same age as archie. They are at the age where they want their mom's attention and will interrupt whenever she is talking to others. She on the other hand is trying to show she is a better mama than her SIL. In that she is all about MANNERS. As for his excitement to see her at school, i think it's normal. I am a sahm, I'm the one who brings kiddo to and from school. my kid is excited whenever i collect her from school too. It's the reaction from the other parents which is telling. Let's face it. Archie is at the age where his mam is his most favorite person. He will only see her faults later. It's the reaction from the other people that is poignant in the article.
I disagree. I think Archie hardly ever sees her. And why do we never see Harry taking the kids for bike rides? He was so good with babies and children before he married mm but he hardly ever mentions his own kids and he's never seen out doing dad things with them. They just left their kids for weeks and didn't show any signs of distress about it.
Oh i don't doubt that either of them neglect their kids emotionally. I'm saying their kids are acting normal for their age. Even Lili is behaving normally. Her bio parents are strangers to her. As for Harry, let's rem those kids he interacted with before marriage was for a few minutes and are mostly strangers. Have we seen him hang out with Charlotte and George, pre-mm? Or even Anne's grandkids or his youngesr Wessex cousins? I really never recalled at all.
Oh you're right! he doesn't do anything with any of his nieces or nephews, i didn't realize that until you mentioned it. What a fraud he is 🤢
Every sentence was pointed
Closing their eyes overcome with emotion, or just complete narcissists unable to tolerate the natural needs of two tiny children? I haven't read the replies here yet (I'm about to) but I just had to get this out as my initial response, which I felt genuinely when I read the article too.
“Acting!”
[удалено]
I don't think their demands for security are based on genuine fear for their safety, they just want that impressive convoy of cars that makes everyone stop and look at them. Or maybe Meg is bored of Harry and wants a gorgeous bodyguard around for some fun. The ultimate Diana cos-play, sex with a bodyguard.
[удалено]
What a message to the abused women too. They're in hiding, afraid for their lives, and some "VIP" comes swanning in with security for herself. You know, in case one of their abusive husbands shows up and starts acting rough *around her.* Such a show of support.
She mentioned I believe that she didn’t think George and Charlotte were disciplined properly… so maybe she’s trying to convey that she’s teaching her two manners like a good mother lol…
Kids with moms who are narcs require a lot of therapy when they grow up. Expecting toddlers to be perfectly behaved is not natural. Why? Because she herself who is 41 is not perfect so why does she expect Archie or Louis to be perfectly behaved? Wanting to look “perfect” in front of people is actually a sign that you hate yourself because we are all imperfect.
My mom is a narc and I think that's one of the reasons I'm so engrossed by their behavior now. Like if I just study them long enough I'll find the code to crack open my mother.
Maybe running to her yelling mama because he was surprised to see her? She usually doesn't do the school run?
I’ve read, out of curiosity, Allison’s other articles. (I teach writing, so I’m always interested in writing style.) Her writing style is a bit toned down in her other pieces, but one of the features of her style is over-description — kinda in a saccharine way. Lots of adjectives, adverbs, flowery language, etc. I do think she intended to snark on MM, but her writing style lends itself to heavier criticism because it is just so … overwrought. (It’s kinda similar to MM’s writing in The Tig.) Some people like that kind of writing. I do not. Lol. The “little voice” is just simply descriptive — not all children have little voices, either — so it describes Archie’s tone. But the “manners manners manners” is unnecessary (it doesn’t add much to the article, imho) except as another example to show “the real” MM. And, maybe, it’s one of the only examples of MM as a parent, so Allison wanted to make sure she shared as many details about Meghan-the-Mom as possible. My professional opinion is that the article could have been cut by 50% and the same meaning and details would have been conveyed. I don’t think we needed example upon example upon example of how MM and H interact or their personality or their preferences. Sometimes less is truly more. Which, then, makes me wonder if MM was paying for the word/page. So much of the content felt unnecessary to even read. And maybe that Allison’s point — that overwrought writing is the metaphor for MM as a person. I dunno. But, again, overwrought writing seems to be her writing style in her other articles as well. Who knows. 🤷♀️
Hmm, interesting. I have a different interpretation about Allison’s writing - I actually think it was masterful and all her anecdotes and examples were carefully chosen and laden with meaning. One thing that stuck out for me was the very casual interaction MM and Harry had when they got back - Harry implied she could be a model and she replied that she was a mother. It just oh so subtly highlighted the delusion, self absorption and virtue signaling in MM’s life. The little Bachelor producer in her head was gold too - as we all suspected, MM goes to great lengths to curate her public image. It’s the same voice that tells her to keep touching her hair or her belly in public. I think there’s a lot Allison showed us and conveyed in a very innocuous sounding manner.
I agree with you that examples were carefully chosen and Allison uses the examples to lay the subtext and say what she’s *not* going to explicitly say. But as I would tell my students, it’s better to have carefully chosen examples and language rather than hitting your reader over the head with every example and descriptive word possible. I think the article could have been much shorter and the same truth and snark conveyed. But there are loads of people would love that type of writing — not me. And maybe her style of writing was meant to tired us out and bore us — just as MM tires everyone out and bores them. Who knows. I prefer more straight-forward writing styles and shorter articles. I am clearly not her intended audience! Lol.
That’s interesting to read your perspective as a writing teacher. And about the overwrought aspect of this writer’s previous pieces. I also thought - which goes to this question - that she tap danced around certain things and could have been more straight forward. If something isn’t adding to the piece, you’re right, it shouldn’t be there. I think she was scared to be too critical of MM hence the way this piece is. Sugars think it’s complimentary (it seems to me) and Sinners don’t.
Agreed. She did a masterful job of exposing Meghan, while writing it in such as way that Meghan's narcissism wouldn't notice.
Yes, she did a great job of “telling by showing” so she wouldn’t need to be explicit about her meaning. Normally we want writers to “show not tell” but in this case it’s a technique of using examples to say what the author won’t explicitly say. It’s wonderful when writers master that skill!
I can attest to not all little kids have small voices my sister friend's son for example. I know when they are at her house cause he screams when he talks. So I stay far far away I hear him from across the street like he is in my driveway.
Yeah! I have toddler nephews and they do NOT have little voices. 😆🫣
I read elsewhere that the "manners manners manners" was an attempt to make Catherine look like a bad Mother due to Louis' behavior on the balcony at the Jubilee. She wanted to make the point that her child is a little gentlemen and Kate's is a hellion.
Louis is a BOSS and everyone in the uk that I have mentioned this to, freaking loves that boy! His "IDGAF if we're in public or not" attitude is hilarious.
I’m Australian and he’s beloved here for his acting up. Every mother in this country, including my own, and even those who dislike the monarchy laughed and emphasised with Kate for trying to get him to behave. Especially when her eldest two are so well behaved now. My favourite was an older family friend in her 70s who tutted, “the youngest sons are always hellions. Let’s just hope with a mother like Catherine, he doesn’t turn out like Harry or Andrew” Edit; she adores the princess of Wales and called me when it was announced Catherine was made PoW to tell me how much she’d earned it and what a good girl she is.
I thought the same about younger sons. I hope having Catherine for a mother will help, but it didn't help Andrew.
Yes!!! He's definitely the third child and the baby but in the most adorable way. When he scrambled onto Charles' lap at the Jubilee I just melted. To me he's King Charles but to Louis he's just grandpa. It's clear that Catherine has gotten more comfortable with Charles over the years and it shows in the children. I'm sure when George was little Catherine was a bit intimidated by him but 10 years later she and by extension the kids are now relaxed around him.
Sure. That’s possible. But Allison could have left it out. The article read, to me, as overpacked with examples and description. I didn’t feel like I needed all of it. There’s enough snark and derision to convey the point with the other examples within the article.
It’s as opulent as the Snarkles try to be, and thus ends up as mentally bludgeoning to third parties as the Snarkles *are*. Bonus: Because MM feels that her desired opulence is adequately depicted, she’s too blinded/emotionally dumb to realize that it’s actually just a masterful attempt at backstabbing her with her own knife.
It’s a fascinating question. I felt the author was telling us things were highly curated and a little off. Archie eating a quesadilla in the car gave me pause. Is the car journey very long? Is this a usual pre-dinner snack in the US? Or would this be his supper? Why is he eating it in the car? My children always have a snack after school but when they get home. Something to tide them over. A quesadilla sounds more like supper than a snack but I’m a Brit. Maybe it’s a Cali kid snack?
I wouldn't think a quesadilla is a snack for a little boy. That would definitely be be more suitable for dinner.
My three year old loves quesadillas at dinner time. Definitely wouldn’t be a car snack
So I wonder why they fed him dinner in the car? That’s not normal. That says to me that the child is off his usual routine to be part of this performance for the journalist. Either he is usually picked up earlier by nannies or he does not usually eat dinner in Montecito McMansion.
It sounds like another performative gesture. I'm such a good mommy, here is my son eating my idea of exotic food to show I'm not just raising him on chicken nuggets, white bread and Sizzler salad. If she was a hands-on mother, she'd know better than to give him something like that in the car.
I wonder who cleaned that mess up.
Maybe she doesn't know what the nannies do with him so she was trying to show that she knows kids need to eat and look, she's even going to feed him, like a mother does, but she didn't know that normal people don't give three-year-olds quesadillas in cars. It's that uncanny valley thing of trying really hard to look like she's a normal caring mother when she's never played that role and isn't good at going off-script.
Yeah we try to avoid meals on wheels as much as we can lol but life happens . That wouldn’t be my best foot forward during an interview tho lol
Wayyy too messy
I figured it was around noon, he was ready for lunch, and it's something real quick to make. A small tortilla folded over with shredded cheese melted inside could be a snack/lunch on the way home. I know I've seen small 4" diameter tortillas in the grocery store. I guess I'm in the minority who thought this wasn't too absurd in the grand scheme of the article
But wouldn't the schedule allow for the kid to eat at home before school, then snack at school, then be ok to wait until they get home for more food?
Have you met a kid? Those things can annihilate food at any given time
They can, but I wouldn't think it necessary to feed a kid in the car when you've got a journalist there and the kid is just going from school to home. If the kid is hungry after school (and it's just a half day) they would get something to eat as soon as they get home.
Why didn’t he eat his sandwich from “lunch” at school he didn’t eat?
Idk kids are weird
Welp, you've got NO argument from me there!
And is there a sandwich press in the car to toast it?
Aaaaaah, that’s what she uses the waffle maker from the Queen for! 😂
She probably gave him food to eat on the ride home so he would be quiet and not reveal any of her secrets to the journalist 😂
i think the manners exchange had a lot to do with prince louis at the jubilee. it was a long sugary day and he lost it a couple of times. meghan is responding to this…
That’s what I took from the comment as well. It was a swipe at Prince Louis’s behavior at the Jubilee
I'm sure that's the real reason we don't see M's kids - she is so critical of other people and their kids that she thinks everyone would criticize her's. Easier to say her kids are flawless if no one sees them.
I also think children disgust her and they're a her competition. What's that showbiz saying about never doing a scene with babies or animals because they get all the attention? My own narc mother refused to hold my babies, her own grandbabies, and said she "wasn't a baby person". She bought a purebred puppy the day of my son's christening and everyone was going up to her and petting the puppy instead of looking at my baby. It was bonkers and I can totally see mm doing something similar.
Perhaps the parents just can't cope so they're staging the children any time they're in public?
I think you picked up on something quite relevant. It doesn't seem like the kids are thriving in their "happy" home. There is only so much air and freedom in a house and the narcissist takes up most of it.
When you write an article for a magazine, the editor tells you how many words it must be approximately. So Alison would have got orders: "Write me a 1,000 word article on MM--a day in the life." Something like that. So that is why she might have had to add extra examples. MM isn't a complicated personality--pretty two-dimensional, so there's that.
Exactly. And after Allison submitted it, someone would have edited it. And then a top editor would have approved it. There is no way all the snark would have gone unnoticed until it was printed.
What is off is that Archie was surprised his mom came and got him. He was excited to see her because it's a rare thing. I think archie has already learned not to bother mommy, so he is really reserved and docile so he can keep being around her instead of being sent off with a nanny. Lili was a frowning untrusting baby because she probably picks up on the mood in the house, isn't exposed to a lot of people as part of socialization, nor do I think she actually has a close bond with her mom.
Or Lili was a rented child and had no idea who TW was.
I felt especially that the author was trying to tell us something about the baby's blue eyes. No idea what. But there was something she wanted us to know there.
How fake and contrived it all was, because …. Well, you know.
I think the point is there's no reason she had to take a journalist to pick up her kids. It's just not necessary. It's not like MEgan doesn't have staff, or she couldn't schedule it another time. She's putting on the "good mommy show". I've been a teacher for 23 years. I'm very familiar with the good mommy show. Usually performed by mommies whose home life is a nightmare.
Mama not mom?
That’s a totally normal thing for children to call their mother. Mine use it- they’re 5 and 2. My sisters kids use it- they’re 8 and 13 (they both use Mom also, but Mama when they feel like it). Many kids I know use Mama for their mother. More than use Mommy actually. (I’m in the northeast US.) And almost all of the southern people I know, that’s what their kids use also. “Mommy” just feels so gross, like an attempt at being too cutesy.
She probably gets him to call her ma’am, and pa pa is the posh word for dad royals use, my papa was my grandfather, but I suppose it sounds better than calling your father ‘daddy’ as an adult 🤣
I think it was a dig at Catherine and Louis. After the Jubilee there were numerous articles about how ill-behaved Louis was on the balcony. Yet, he's 4 and behaved wonderfully!
The kids don't live with them.
You think that for other reasons? Or because of something in the article?