[ SECRET POST #5276 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5276 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #755.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Didn't they already give up their titles?

Is it really so wild for a couple to name a baby after the father's grandmother and dead mom?? Particularly after another death in the family?

[(Anonymous)]

1) They're still Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but cannot call themselves "His Royal Highness" and "Her Royal Highness" or use "royal" in their marketing and branding.

2) No, for normal families. British royals aren't really normal though, and they've got various rules about things.

3) You mean Prince Philip? The baby isn't named Philip (or Philippa), though, so I'm not sure what his death has to do with it.

Basically there's some uncomfortable history between the Queen and Princess Diana, both before and after Diana's death. Linking the two names (and using the Queen's nickname as a proper name) was always going to cause a stir and all the involved parties would have known this.

[(Anonymous)]

If I recall the story correctly wasn't Lilabet something Prince Philip called Queen Elizabeth? So naming the baby Lilabet was a nod to them both? Or maybe they just loved the name and thought it would be a good tie in while also making it very clear they weren't going to be following tradition anymore? Also, is anyone *really* surprised that Harry incorporated Diana into some part of his first daughter's name?

Look, I never really cared about the royals before outside of the general empathy I give all people, annoyance that people who do care about royals refuse to even consider that maybe some of the criticism leveled towards Markle might be racist, and the American sense of "Wow, royals in the modern age, how antiquated by kinda cool, bet it is both deluxe and really shit at the same time."

But it does seem to me that people have fixated on Markle--in "oh my god I am really uncomfortable with a dark-skinned person this close to the throne in a way I can't identify even though she'll realistically never get anywhere near it" ways or in "oh my god I am really uncomfortable with an American actress from a lower-class family this close to the throne because at least Kate Middleton had the grace to be rich and get royally trashed by tabloids and the nobility as a class-hopping upstart before she started having babies and we decided we loved her after all" ways. And maybe it's both, and maybe it's neither, and maybe it's just because Markle represents change in an institution defined by its resistance to change in an era equally defined by uncertainty. And all of that can be true and Markle can still a snotty actress who thought she was getting a fairytale ending other people didn't think she deserved--people who are even more mad that she had the gall to dip from something they barely "let" her have in the first place--who didn't deserve the crap she got when she committed the great crime of getting married to someone without fully understanding the complexities of her new husband's family dynamics.

You can still have strong thoughts about it. I just think there's a lot of reflexive defensiveness from all sides that should be unpacked before you get snarly about it.

[(Anonymous)]

Where did I get snarly about it? You asked questions, and I tried to answer them in good faith.

You're addressing a large and vocal group of people who are very hard on Meghan and to a lesser extent, Harry. I don't disagree that there's a strong element of racism behind a lot of her bad media coverage and the criticism, and there's definitely a lot going on behind the scenes where nobody comes out smelling like roses, but Meghan is bearing an unfair share of the blame.

No, it's not unusual to name a child after his/her grandmother, or great-grandmother. But this case is not exactly your average family, and the two people involved are Princess Diana and the Queen. There's never NOT going to be a big fuss over Harry and Meghan naming their kid after both women, and generally, people who know the infamous history of the royal family, their treatment of Diana, the harsh criticism leveled at the Queen because of it, the huge, embarrassing dust-up over Diana and Charles' divorce and what role the royal family played in it before, during and after would realize that while it's not a surprise that those names were chosen, it's never not going to be controversial.