The royal wedding who cares.(Maybe Meghan)(Lovers of Royal Wedding thread)

Lackey

https://twitter.com/FrTedQOTD/status/997802426743705600

taytobreath

I hear the duchess of Sussex a few times, is she not a princess now

iamwhoiam

taytobreath wrote: »

I hear the duchess of Sussex a few times, is she not a princess now

Neither is Kate

King George VI

taytobreath wrote: »

I hear the duchess of Sussex a few times, is she not a princess now

She is a British Princess. The word Princess just isn't in her official title.

splinter65

taytobreath wrote: »

I hear the duchess of Sussex a few times, is she not a princess now

No only certain people are princesses. She’s a duchess is wot she is gord bless her and all who sail in her .

AllGunsBlazing

What time is the disco at?

dougm1970

that southern preacher is going to be entertainment by 1am with 12 pints in him...and half a bottle of southern comfort...propping up the bar..... "there ya go...there ya go...every time i talk about joe louis a white man has to pull rocky marciano outta their ass....joe louis was 137 years old marciano beat him !!"

prince charles tripping over his laces trying to get to the bar to pronounce henry cooper

JupiterKid

Saw the end of the event. Meghan's dress was elegant and tasteful and she looked stunning. Harry looked rather dishy in his uniform! The cellist was superb.

I wish them well - it seemed a very happy and relatively relaxed royal wedding.

Some seriously hot men present...Gorgeous George, Haskell the rugger (woof!!) and Dermot O'Leary (please marry me ).

Those comments by stonedpilot were despicable and vile.

jojofizzio

razorblunt wrote: »

Wait the people outside Windsor Castle are dressed u like they're actually going to a wedding, WTF?

Not as “out-there”as the staff in Coast in Cork all decked out like wedding guests this morning

blueser

Stonedpilot wrote: »

Shes well use to being on her back. Cheap Californian d list actress slag if she didnt meet the ginger lad be doing gangbangs in porn.

I mean prior to this she was "a briefcase girl on the American deal or no deal"!.

Clever girl though. A licentious pauper Marrying into money. Clever.

Banned.

Really classy comment. Well done you.

Addle

Were other European royals not there?

valoren

Everytime I hear the Duchess of Sussex it sounds like a name from WWE e.g. The Master of Disaster, The Mouth from the South....

igCorcaigh

Menu sounds nice:

Canapés, including:

Scottish Langoustines wrapped in Smoked Salmon with Citrus Crème Fraiche
Grilled English Asparagus wrapped in Cumbrian Ham
Garden Pea Panna Cotta with Quail Eggs and Lemon Verbena
Heritage Tomato and Basil Tartare with Balsamic Pearls
Poached Free Range Chicken bound in a Lightly Spiced Yoghurt with Roasted Apricot
Croquette of Confit Windsor Lamb, Roasted Vegetables and Shallot Jam
Warm Asparagus Spears with Mozzarella and Sun-Blush Tomatoes

Bowl food including:

Fricassee of Free Range Chicken with Morel Mushrooms and Young Leeks
Pea and Mint Risotto with Pea Shoots, Truffle Oil and Parmesan Crisps
Ten Hour Slow Roasted Windsor Pork Belly with Apple Compote and Crackling

Sweet canapés including:

Champagne and Pistachio Macaroons
Orange Crème Brûlée Tartlets
Miniature Rhubarb Crumble Tartlets

(That's my shopping list sorted.)

igCorcaigh

Addle wrote: »

Were other European royals not there?

Not sure good question

titan18

Addle wrote:

Were other European royals not there?

Don't think so as Harry isn't considered in the direct line anymore.

sabat

I wonder how MI5 are going to bump her off when she gets bored and uppity about 12 years from now-the old car crash scamola is off the table for obvious reasons .

Addle

Royalty is bizarre.
Weddings are bizarre.
It really is the most fantastic bizarre show.
I'm loving the fashion.

Noveight

sabat wrote: »

I wonder how MI5 are going to bump her off when she gets bored and uppity about 12 years from now-the old car crash scamola is off the table for obvious reasons .

Diana was 20 when she married, Megz is 36 so there’s less of a chance she’ll take flight in a few years.

Queeny and Big Phil will be brown bread within 5 years anyways, so if she can stick it that long she’s in the clear I reckon.

sunbeam

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Not sure good question

They didn't invite any foreign royalty, politicians or head's of state. That said, even though they are related to most of them they don't really bother with them. They've sent Edward and Sophie off to every European royal wedding for the past 10+ years as nobody else could be arsed going.

sunbeam

taytobreath wrote: »

I hear the duchess of Sussex a few times, is she not a princess now

She is Princess Henry, just as Kate is Princess William. George's birth cert confirmed that Kate is a princess of the United Kingdom.

igCorcaigh

sunbeam wrote: »

That said, even though they are related to most of them they don't really bother with them.

Bit like us common people so then.

The Talking Bread

sabat wrote: »

I wonder how MI5 are going to bump her off when she gets bored and uppity about 12 years from now-the old car crash scamola is off the table for obvious reasons .

Bit of a difference between these two marriages and respective couples, in fact they couldn't be more different

The Talking Bread

sunbeam wrote: »

She is Princess Henry, just as Kate is Princess William. George's birth cert confirmed that Kate is a princess of the United Kingdom.

No she isn't. She is NOT a princess, barring informal references.

igCorcaigh

The Talking Bread wrote: »

No she isn't. She is NOT a princess, barring informal references.

Don't rain on her parade

TheRiverman

Anyone watch the RTE coverage ?.I watched parts of it on BBC.Huw Edwards and Kirsty Young are great broadcasters.I thought Dermot O'Leary was way too fidgety,excited,maybe even nervous and didn't do a very good job.

sunbeam

Yes, she is, by marriage. She is styled as the Duchess of Cambridge as her husband is a Duke. Princess Michael is so called, because she is married to Prince Michael of Kent and he is not a Duke or an Earl.


Edi: link to George Birth Cert: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2383616/Prince-George-William-Kate-formally-register-birth-Kensington-Palace-mother-puts-Princess-United-Kingdom-occupation.html

titan18

sunbeam wrote:

They didn't invite any foreign royalty, politicians or head's of state. That said, even though they are related to most of them they don't really bother with them. They've sent Edward and Sophie off to every European royal wedding for the past 10+ years as nobody else could be arsed going.

They did to William and Kate's wedding. But as he's the likeliest successor to the throne, it was a far bigger occasion.

Livvie

Speaking as a non-Royalist Brit, I do like Harry - he can't help his family and seems like an ok guy.  Thought Megan looked stunning and very natural with it.  Loved the gospel type sermon - disappointed that the Queen didn't jump up and wave her arms to the heavens and shout Hallelujah.  A few years ago it wouldn't have been entertained for a royal Prince to marry a non-virginal, mixed race, American actress who was raised a Catholic.  I doubt William would have been allowed to, but it is progress.   I understand Prince Charles paid for the actual wedding. I guess the taxpayer will foot the bill for the security - but we also pay for stuff like bombing Iraq, and I know which I'm happier to do.
Incidentally - apparently, Di didn't meet James Hewitt until after Harry was born. Who knows, but he does look like her side of the family more than he does Charles' side, which is something to be thankful for. He does have the Windsor bald spot though....

_Dara_

She wasn’t raised Catholic. Both parents are Protestant.

Always number 1

splinter65 wrote: »

No only certain people are princesses. She’s a duchess is wot she is gord bless her and all who sail in her .

I think you can only be a Princess if you're a daughter born to an heir to the throne. Hence Eugenie, Beatrice and Charlotte are but Zara Phillips isn't.
Edward's daughter isn't a Princess because although he is a Prince he will become Duke of Edinburgh when Philip dies which brings a different set of titles..
It's quite interesting if you're into that sort of thing.

igCorcaigh

Livvie wrote: »

Speaking as a non-Royalist Brit, I do like Harry - he can't help his family and seems like an ok guy.  Thought Megan looked stunning and very natural with it.  Loved the gospel type sermon - disappointed that the Queen didn't jump up and wave her arms to the heavens and shout Hallelujah.  A few years ago it wouldn't have been entertained for a royal Prince to marry a non-virginal, mixed race, American actress who was raised a Catholic.  I doubt William would have been allowed to, but it is progress.   I understand Prince Charles paid for the actual wedding. I guess the taxpayer will foot the bill for the security - but we also pay for stuff like bombing Iraq, and I know which I'm happier to do.
Incidentally - apparently, Di didn't meet James Hewitt until after Harry was born. Who knows, but he does look like her side of the family more than he does Charles' side, which is something to be thankful for. He does have the Windsor bald spot though....

I liked the fact that she didn't want the word obey in the vow.

BTW: Is that still commonly said in marriage vows?

splinter65

titan18 wrote: »

They did to William and Kate's wedding. But as he's the likeliest successor to the throne, it was a far bigger occasion.

Williams wedding was a state occasion this one is not.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I'm going to go against the grain here and say on some side profile shots she's not actually that attractive looking (my own opinion). Pretty eyes and teeth, but a peculiar jawline.

But sure whats it matter, the lad was obviously crazy in love with her during the ceremony.

Overall I enjoyed the whole ceremony, and not too much pomp. I liked the singers, but not sure about the American bishop chap. It looked like he had the congregation lost and bored with that speel about fire and love.

The Household Guard are the best in the world at what they do, brilliant stuff from the military.

Mars Bar

Livvie wrote: »

Speaking as a non-Royalist Brit, I do like Harry - he can't help his family and seems like an ok guy.  Thought Megan looked stunning and very natural with it.  Loved the gospel type sermon - disappointed that the Queen didn't jump up and wave her arms to the heavens and shout Hallelujah.  A few years ago it wouldn't have been entertained for a royal Prince to marry a non-virginal, mixed race, American actress who was raised a Catholic.  I doubt William would have been allowed to, but it is progress.   I understand Prince Charles paid for the actual wedding. I guess the taxpayer will foot the bill for the security - but we also pay for stuff like bombing Iraq, and I know which I'm happier to do.
Incidentally - apparently, Di didn't meet James Hewitt until after Harry was born. Who knows, but he does look like her side of the family more than he does Charles' side, which is something to be thankful for. He does have the Windsor bald spot though....

I totally see a resemblance between Harry and Prince Charles!

Addle

THE ROMANCE...
https://mobile.twitter.com/VituLucena/status/997831658723299330/video/1

sunbeam

Usually only princesses by birth are referred to as Princess Firstname in the UK. Diana, should have never been called 'Princess Diana'-it was the press that started to call her that and it caught on.

A notable exception was Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester. After the death of her husband she wrote to the Queen and obtained permission to be called Princess Alice as she did not want to be known as the Dowager Duchess, or be confused with her daughter in law, who then held the title.

She married in 1935 at the age of 34 in a pink dress and veil:http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.ie/2011/11/wedding-wednesday-alice-duchess-of.html

I'm having a look again at some of the fashion. Victoria Beckham's dress was very dull I thought. The woman in the blue spotty dress looked like a school girl. I loved Amal and James Blunt's wife. Oh to be there in the midst of it all. Even better would be to swap places with Meghan

sunbeam

Always number 1 wrote: »

I think you can only be a Princess if you're a daughter born to an heir to the throne. Hence Eugenie, Beatrice and Charlotte are but Zara Phillips isn't.
Edward's daughter isn't a Princess because although he is a Prince he will become Duke of Edinburgh when Philip dies which brings a different set of titles..
It's quite interesting if you're into that sort of thing.

In the UK, only daughters of a prince or King are styled as Princess Firstname. Edward and Sophie's kids also could have been, They requested lesser titles so that their kids would be styled as the children of an earl, come under less public scrutiny and have easier lives. I'm not sure what will happen when he becomes Duke of Edinburgh. Some argue that if James and Louise want to start styling themselves as Prince and Princess they could technically do it even now, but that is debatable.


Incidentally, unless the Queen dies or issues more letters patent Harry and Meghan's kids will not be princes or princesses. That title was supposed to be restricted to the first great grandson of the monarch, but the Queen changed this, so that all of Will and Kate's kids would hold titles.

JP Liz V1

Is Idris djing at after's shindig? Oh to a be fly at that do when all buckled

citytillidie

A Royal wedding without Royal blood do they count.


:pac:

Livvie

_Dara_ wrote: »

She wasn’t raised Catholic. Both parents are Protestant.

That's fake news for you!

seenitall

Some observations:

The newlyweds looked so cute and so much in love. I think she was beautiful and radiant, and he definitely trumps his brother in the looks department (although that's not saying much, but still...).

Loved the dress, simple but stylish. Maybe the train was a tiny bit OTT!

The Family mostly their usual selves. I love the way Fergie walked in like she owned the place! In spite of being separated from her daughters. Chutzpah. I do like that woman for some reason.

Amal was fidgety and looked ill at ease, constantly tugging at her hair or hat. The body language between her and Gorgeous (but ageing) George looked to be very solid, though. Also, she could do with eating a bit more food at some point.

The Beckhams... a totally different story. She looked utterly miserable even for the usual VB standard of miserable. While he was on a different mind plane altogether. So obvious. Body language all about her control. Essentially, you would rarely see two people so out of synch with each other. I predict trouble in paradise.

Very enjoyable couple of hours of entertainment, anyway! The best of luck to the newlyweds.

blueser

seenitall wrote: »

Some observations:

The newlyweds looked so cute and so much in love. I think she was beautiful and radiant, and he definitely trumps his brother in the looks department (although that's not saying much, but still...).

Loved the dress, simple but stylish. Maybe the train was a tiny bit OTT!

The Family mostly their usual selves. I love the way Fergie walked in like she owned the place! In spite of being separated from her daughters. Chutzpah. I do like that woman for some reason.

Amal was fidgety and looked ill at ease, constantly tugging at her hair or hat. The body language between her and Gorgeous (but ageing) George looked to be very solid, though. Also, she could do with eating a bit more food at some point.

The Beckhams... a totally different story. She looked utterly miserable even for the usual VB standard of miserable. While he was on a different mind plane altogether. So obvious. Body language all about her control. Essentially, you would rarely see two people so out of synch with each other. I predict trouble in paradise.

Very enjoyable couple of hours of entertainment, anyway! The best of luck to the newlyweds.

Victoria Beckham looking miserable? Surely not!

igCorcaigh

Mars Bar wrote: »

I totally see a resemblance between Harry and Prince Charles!

Harry is quite handsome, but I don't think he'll age well. He's 33 now.

riffmongous

It's been worth it for the simpsons memes, some very funny stuff today

jojofizzio

_Dara_ wrote: »

She wasn’t raised Catholic. Both parents are Protestant.

Think she went to a Catholic school-that might be where people are getting the Catholic link

Dr. Bre

Is idris Alba doing DJ?

mcgiggles

titan18 wrote:

Don't think so as Harry isn't considered in the direct line anymore.

sunbeam wrote:

They didn't invite any foreign royalty, politicians or head's of state. That said, even though they are related to most of them they don't really bother with them. They've sent Edward and Sophie off to every European royal wedding for the past 10+ years as nobody else could be arsed going.

titan18 wrote:

They did to William and Kate's wedding. But as he's the likeliest successor to the throne, it was a far bigger occasion.

igCorcaigh wrote:

BTW: Is that still commonly said in marriage vows?

I watched rte coverage they said harry and meghan didn't feel the need to invite everyone like William and Kate did. Harry was 5th in line to the throne, but is now 6th with the birth of Louis! So they can get away without all the foreign royal invites! They focused more on people involved in charity work as that's what they love!

mcgiggles

igCorcaigh wrote:

I liked the fact that she didn't want the word obey in the vow.

igCorcaigh wrote:

BTW: Is that still commonly said in marriage vows?

Not usually I don't think! Not sure about english weddings! It's not been in any of the dozen or so weddings I've been to in the last 3 years!

bubbles o hara

Serious question. Are guests expected to give a gift? I can't imagine Harry and Meghan are in need of a toaster or foot spa. :pac: