Saturday, 15 April 2017

Is it a H? Meghan Steps Out in Toronto Wearing New Ring!

Hello, I'm just popping in with a very quick post covering the latest candid shot of Meghan out and about in Toronto on Thursday. As we know, Prince Harry was photographed arriving at Meghan's apartment on Wednesday night, giving them the opportunity to spend Easter together. It will be a relatively short trip as Harry has engagements in London next week leading up to the London Marathon.


The chatter around this set of photos has very much centred on a delicate gold ring Meghan wore. Is it an 'H'? A gift from Harry or something else entirely?


People reports it's actually a Hamsa Evil Eye ring:

'The Suits star was spotted wearing a delicate gold ring with what appeared to be Prince Harry’s initial on it. But in fact, the accessory was an evil eye ring that was mistaken for the letter “H.” The couple is known for sharing their affections for one another with matching bracelets, monogrammed necklace and matching cashmere beanies. In December, Markle wore a monogrammed “H & M” necklace from Maya Brenner.'

It was an eclectic mix of brands for Meghan's off-duty look. Montreal-based brand SOIA & Kyo confirmed Meghan wore their jacket and baseball cap.


The $310 Nallie sports jacket is described: "An exposed two-way zip closes the placket and hood of this rain-ready Soia & Kyo jacket. An inset front panel offers extra protection, with a stand-up collar and zip closure. Toggle drawstrings cinch the waist, and snaps secure the hip pockets. Vented hem. Lined."

SOIA & KYO

A look at a product shot of Meghan's baseball cap.

SOIA & KYO

Meghan's J Crew Chambray Shirt in 'afternoon sky' (such a pretty colour description) is a piece fans of Suits will be familiar with. What Meghan Wore noted she actually wore it during the last season of the show. It's currently half price at J Crew.


Meghan's chic footwear is the Chanel Leather Cap-Toe flats featuring embroidered interlocking CC, grosgrain trim, tonal stitching throughout and stacked heels.


And you'll recognise Meghan's Goyard tote and yoga mat from earlier this week. Her ripped jeans are thought to be a past season style she's had for some time.


With thanks to Meghan's Mirror, What Meghan Wore and Laura for their work on the ID's!

Next week, we'll be starting our 'Meet Meghan' series with a focus on getting to know her better. In the meantime, Happy Easter! :)

42 comments:

  1. An "H" initial ring worn by a 35 year old for any other reason than perhaps her child's initial is rather unusual. High school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Julia from Leominster15 April 2017 at 21:05

      The second part of mine - out of order. So I say slow everything down - let this romance become a steady flame, not a wildfire and see if it can sustain that. I would very much like to see Kate take twenty-one steps forward - develop interests outside of William's, and become a princess for the 21st century because I have seen a major fall off of attention since the wedding - young people don't find her easy to relate to - and an ability to relate is vital to a successful royal - the old generation aren't going to be there to support a retro Kate and William.
      Meghan I believe, could become a representative for a new multi-cultural Britain and her dynamic interests and drive would well suit (no pun, I never watch legal dramas) a younger son's wife who can step out a bit more - but I would like to see her take ten steps back and slow down just a bit - without losing that easy heart and love of cooking and pets that makes her appealing outside of her charitable work. She is going to need to become less political if she is to marry a role and using this time to focus on developing her interests with an eye to that - would be an excellent thing.
      As for comments - there will always be speculation about motives - there will always be critiquing in public life - it is part of a world where taxpayers are funding lifestyles that exceed their own - I don't feel this is bad if done in a thoughtful way - so I would like to see comments left open so people can speak freely.
      And initial rings are tacky Meghan - lost all the initial stuff - unless it's your own.
      Love the Blog, Charlotte.

      Delete
  2. Hi, another great post! I follow both of your blogs and am really enjoying this new one - thank you for all of the time you must spend compiling them! Looking forward to next weeks posts. Hope you have a wonderful Easter too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you very much Jenn and Happy Easter :)

      Delete
  3. Julia from Leominster15 April 2017 at 21:03

    My first post here and it's a cautious one.
    The first thing I would say is that I like Meghan - I like her style, I like her interests, I like how she has steadily built herself up and that she hasn't just been an actress - from the start she had other interests. I admire her charitable concerns. Mentioning menstruation may not be unusual with aide workers but it is unheard of within the royal family - it's almost impossible to imagine Kate doing so. I like the fact Meghan has a plan for life - I think she will push forward regardless of whether she marries Harry or not. Closing her blog could and probably does mean her relationship with Harry is growing - but if the relationship doesn't pan out - it also positions her to start a blog more focused on her charitable interests - less on lifestyle.
    But I can't be hypocritical I can't criticise Pippa for riding on royal coattails without being mindful that Meghan is doing the same with Harry. The situation is a little different - Meghan was pushing causes well before Harry came into the picture - but there have been a string of high-profile boyfriends - a chef, a golfer, now Harry, not mentioning her husband. So I'm a little wary - and there seems to be a big disconnect between Meghan's natural love of attention - something she has needed to build her career - and Harry's dislike of it.

    My immediate feeling is that this romance is too fast and furious - it needs a slowing down and a lot of time - a couple of years at least - Harry's relationship with Chelsy went on for years - she attending weddings but at the end of the day it didn't work. I don't mind a royal divorcee but I would be grateful not to see another royal divorce. I don't think it ned be as bad as Charles and Diana - the Danes have shown it can be managed - but it's never a good thing.
    Patience isn't either Meghan's or Harry's strong point. She's a driver and pusher and he's impulsive - so to me an exercise of patience- whilst Meghan moves away from acting into a full-time charitable- young leader role (who knows if she doesn't marry Harry maybe she will run for president one day. I'm envisioning a situation like Sophie where she continued with her own career during this period - not a beck-and-call-Kate which I was suspicious of at the time and have come to see as a detriment - that Kate didn't have a plan - and it has cost her support because a retro princess is not what the coming generation is looking for.

    I have a lot of sympathy for a long-distance romance as that's what Leo and I had - but these frequent jaunts of Harry to Toronto are costing the taxpayers who cover his security and their travel costs - Harry needs a lot more work to balance this - at this point, he is very flashy and appealing but there is too much flash and not enough slog - I want to see Harry the grafter. (I'm not worried about Meghan here because I believe she is a grafter.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Julia, what do you mean by grafter? That must be a Britishism as I don't know what you mean. I'm assuming it's not the same as a grifter!!

      Understand you point about balancing work. But I do think it's lovely that Harry's willing to go and see her. It's unfortunate that comes with additional expense to the police.

      Delete
    2. Eve from Germany16 April 2017 at 13:40

      Julia, I love your comments, and this one - no exception to the rule! :-)) - once again gave me some "food for thought".
      I agree that in an "ideal world" those two should take a lot of time dating. But years? Meghan is 35, so if they want to have children - and from what I´ve heard they both want to - even the most "rushed" timeline might cause problems in that "department".
      Even if they move in together in the early summer, announce their engagement in, let´s say, November and get married some time next spring; and let´s say they (wisely) wait another year before starting to try for a baby because they want to spend some time as newlyweds and give Meghan at least some time to settle into her new life as member of the BRF, she would be 38 by the time she started to try and become pregnant. Now sometimes statistics are just that, but from all I know as a health practitioner, fertility in women starts to RAPIDLY drop after the age of 35, also the risk of genetic defects increases quite seriously. Of course, there always are exceptions to the rule, but it´s a factor to be considered.

      They are both 30(+), they both had serious relationships, so usually they should both have a pretty good idea of "what works for them" - and what not. Harry might be hot-headed, but I think two terms serving in Afghanistan, with an added "bonus" of representing a potential additional risk for your comrades should anyone "get wind" of your presence there - I can´t imagine that this wouldn´t change even the most "hot-headed"... The constant danger you´re in, certainly puts "everything into perspective" and makes you realize how quickly things can be over before they even had the chance to begin... I have the feeling that having to experience the horrendous marriage of their parents has impacted both William and Harry, although Harry didn´t have to carry the burden of being his mother´s "confidante" like William. I´m sure this makes him less wary of "doing things too quickly", somthing we saw (and still see) in William´s "commitment making process". So I think he´s well aware of what he wants and what he´s doing..

      As far as Harry´s traveling to Toronto is concerned, well, there again, "he won´t be able to do it right". Either they move in together, which might indeed be "rushing things", but at least they would be able to get to know each other under "normal"(for royal standards "normal") circumstances (meaning life being much more that which it will be after the marriage) - or they don´t "rush things", then somehow Harry has to fly to Toronto, at least as long as Meghan is working there or they never truly get to know each other.
      Meghan moving to London, but not together with him - I highly doubt whether that would work, because all hell would break loose, no matter where she lived. The paparazzi wouldn´t even let her breathe without photographing it.

      So I guess under the circumstances, they are just trying to find the best solution to serve them both and their relationship, and I guess, what they are doing right now is about as best as they can do, again, under the circumstances....

      Ok, it´s Easter Sunday and I clearly must have too much time on my hands, what with this long comment. It´s just such an interesting topic and Julia, you just gave me "too much" food for thought.... ;-)))) So, apologies for my "going on and on"!!

      Happy Easter to you all!!

      Delete
    3. Eve from Germany16 April 2017 at 13:42

      Ok, this was the first time my original comment was regarded "too long" by the system, so I had to split it into two....ahem....
      A little something regarding the "motif" subject. I think that ANY woman or man marrying a royal prince/princess has "some" motif. For some reason I just doubt that love alone is sufficient. The very particular lifestyle is something you have to want for yourself. It´s interesting to note, that for some generations now, royal princes (and princesses) had problems finding a suitable partner. Ever since they stopped getting married to "just some other royal", things did not really get easier, but instead more complicated. I remember reading stories back in the late 70ies about "another suitable candidate having turned down Charles" just b e c a u s e the women were "suitable", i.e. accomplished, from well-established families, etc. They just couldn´t see themselves giving up their free and easy "high-society" life for a partner who really was married to his duty and his family.
      Harry, of course, is not the first in line, which certainly does make a difference, but he, his wife, the children, they will all be exposed to the same media and public scrutiny and whoever marries him will definitely lose her freedom for good. So in my opinion something more than love has to be your motivation. I wouldn´t call those women (or men) "cold and calculating", but there must be some kind of appeal that very particular life in the spotlight and being part of that family has to you. Otherwise I´m sure the pressure will be too much or the life not appealing enough/coming with too many strings attached (see Chelsy as probably the best example).

      Delete
    4. Eve, I enjoyed your discussion of the logistical concerns of their courtship (and your other comments). I think Meghan would have a very hard time of it if she moved to London and not live at Kensington Palace. And living at Kensington Palace will give her more close contact with The Firm on a daily basis. She, obviously has gotten her feet wet in that while at Not Cot. I am becoming more and more convinced now that an engagement is forthcoming sooner than later. I was doubtful from the photos of Jamaica. I didn't think we would see them together after that quite frankly. Glad I was mistaken about that, although I still think Harry's behavior there was odd. But what with Meghan closing The Tig, not renewing a very generous contract with Reitman's, rumors of her last season at Suits, rumors of her move to London, and rumors of Harry renovating larger accommodations at Kensington Palace, how can one not think that wedding bells will soon be ringing for them.

      Delete
    5. I agree Julia. I have a hard time with this relationship. Meghan on her own is fine but something just doesn't sit right about the relationship. I think it might be the attention part. They seem very different in that respect and for two high profile people, I think it will end up being a problem. One of them will have to change(and it will most likely be Meghan) and long term, I think it might be a problem.

      Preface, this is going to sound super judgy but Meghan's causes(from what I've seen) are high profile, overseas ones whereas the BRF (W/H and Africa being the exception) tends to stick closer to home. Sometimes I just wonder if celebs feel passionately about the causes or if it's a way of advertising themselves. I wonder how that will work out long term if Meghan ends up married in and is patron of organizations where it is just a visit or two a year. But again, that's me being judgy.

      If they lived in the same city or within an hour or two, the speed of the relationship wouldn't be as big of a deal. Meghan has spent weeks at a time in London which will give an idea about life together but then, she's essentially on vacation and just relaxing. I mean, she probably working on lines and reading scripts but that is very different than daily life together.

      Delete
    6. I suppose when Meghan was in her teens and wrote that letter, she was thinking about her future, being an actress, picking a cause to advertise herself!!!???? Don't be ridiculous.

      Delete
    7. Interesting perspective from all here. Not surprisingly I agree with most of what you all are saying.
      Normally the speed of relationships do not worry me at all. But in a relationship that is largely long distance the actual getting to know one another part of it becomes insignificant because passion takes over initially. I know because I was in one for a long time. So the maturity and security that comes with 2 years in a normal same-city relationship can take much longer in a long-distance one.
      I am really skeptical of the longevity of this match - I confess. I think that Meghan is great but I also think that she is ready to plunge right into the glamor of the royal family and have babies. I think that Harry really wants babies as well. And I think that is what is hastening this relationship forward. I guess that I may be wrong - they may turn out to be very well-suited for each other, but that would come down to luck, to some extent.
      In any marriage it is less about "who" and more about "how" right? So maybe these guys both have high EQ and are great at communicating and will adjust very well to married life and children. But I don't think they are being tested in that way. Not with the distance and the prospect of a lifetime of huge wealth hanging in the balance. The latter can smooth over many small things in the beginning - things that are likely to be disruptive later. I am not saying that they are not besotted with each other right now. I am just saying that the circumstances don't allow for a careful weighing of strengths and weaknesses of the relationship for either of them. Usually couples wait for the besotted phase to pass, by then the quirks have emerged. Many relationships are made or broken at this point. Harry and Meghan probably won't reach that phase before the wedding. So of course now everything is all peaches and cream. It's after the first few years that you begin to start driving each other batty and that is when the relationship is tested.
      Only time will tell how it goes.
      I also agree that it is beyond ridiculous to wear these H rings etc. So juvenile that I can't help but wonder. I wonder if the Suits people mandate that she needs to have a certain number of pap shots each month or something.

      Delete
    8. Julia from Leominster17 April 2017 at 06:33

      bluhare (always a pleasure) graft means work - so a grafter is a hard worker - Grifter is quite different.

      Eve, you have written well, but the relationship is still too breathless for my taste - and I remain a believer that there should be another year at least. Katie has raised concerns that are similar to mine.

      Sophie was ideally set up because she already had a job - it does make logistical problems otherwise, but not as messy as a divorce would be.

      Delete
    9. I must say I am a bit shocked how people analyse this relationship from every aspect.

      I think a marriage can fall apart from many reasons: some people get married after 2-3 months of dating and spend a lifetime together, some has a long dating history and give up on each other shortly after the wedding, or after 20 years. In life anything can happen.

      I trust these 2,they are not in their teens, had relationships before.

      I just wonder, what you would all say about a relationship of W&K, if we went back in time around 2008. Would you bet on a wedding for example?

      So for me the best is to sit back and look forward to the happenings.

      Delete
    10. Anett, I know exactly what you mean. Although, with a blogsite full of diverse women (AND men) I doubt that creative speculation will not continue. :)

      And, funny you mention W & K, lol. I remember the day. I had just purchased a people magazine or something like that with photos and articles of William and Kate. I quickly glanced through it and then put it on my magazine stack. A couple of days later I was cleaning and saw the magazine. I just all of a sudden got so tired of hearing about William and Kate "dating". I picked the magazine up with fervor, tossed it determinedly into the trash can, thinking or saying "I am so tried of you stringing Kate along William. Get serious. Put a ring on her finger William. I'm done with this." lol The next day their engagement was announced. I retrieved my, yet unsoiled, magazine from the trash and got back onboard with William and Kate. And here I am on DKB today. Not too fickle, lol.

      Delete
    11. I don't see what there is to be shocked at, Anett. Analytical people are just giving their opinions the same way you give yours on Kate.
      Yes, relationships can last a lifetime when people get married after 2-3 months, but that has a much lower probability - don't you think? There are factors that predict the success and failure of marriages and some of us were just elaborating on that. It doesn't mean that I am not rooting for their success. I want everyone to be happy and have fulfilling lives.
      As for Kate's relationship in 2008 - honestly I did not follow her, so can't say what I would have thought.

      Delete
    12. I am probably shocked because he did not yet propose but we are talking about their marriage and how it is gonna fail. Also, when I keep on reading the comments, they are mainly negative,full of doubts and suspicision, I just would like to know/understand the reason why.

      2-3 months, no I don't think. How one fits with the other require loads of work. I have seen many examples lately that after 2-3 months people mate for life. Of course, you are rooting for them, I don't doubt that.

      Surfer girl

      I see no "creative" speculation but judgement, for example her wearing H necklace/ring etc.

      Delete
    13. Generally speaking I agree with you, Rosman. Although Mr. bluhare and I were about Harry and Meghan's age when we married 30 years ago -- after knowing each other for 5 months all told. So it can be done, and the fact they're older, and the fact that she knows a bit of what it's like to live life in the public fishbowl gives them a better shot at it than some, I think.

      I don't think you need to wait 10 years before you marry a royal. I think she's getting quite a taste of what it's like being with Harry and even the negative aspects -- Pippa's wedding for example. Plenty of "no ring no bring" articles about that including talk about Pippa not wanting to be upstaged, not to mention being photographed with long lenses at Inskip's wedding.

      And they aren't engaged yet. But it looks like they may be moving toward it. They may change their minds. They may not. But I hope they are happy, and I hope that whatever happens is the best thing for everybody.

      Delete
  4. Unless Harry bought her the ring she should probably leave the "advertising" like that of the relationship alone. It is like the messages she was leaving on her blogsite. Not the best thing to do. We all know she is dating Harry. No need to let us know via rings and necklaces, unless they were gifts from Harry. Hope photos show up of Harry and Meghan attending Easter Services. That would compliment his holiday journey there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think some article said it was a specific brand and the H was for the brand but really Meghan? You didn't think that one through? Common sense says with Harry as your boyfriend any item with an H monogram is not a wise choice. You look like you are a high school girl flaunting your boyfriend.

      Delete
    2. Katie?
      You are seriously mean girling here, you know that.

      Delete
    3. No, I am agreeing with Surfer Girl and echoing what was said last fall/winter when Meghan wore the 'H' necklace.

      Delete
    4. I don't think Katie's being a "mean girl" at all. Meghan has been flaunting this relationship, especially all over social media, from the start. (That Christmas photo where she was standing with her arm at an extremely awkward angle to make sure her blue bracelet could be seen, anyone?) It's the main reason I haven't warmed up to her.
      --Christine

      Delete
    5. I am sorry to hear that it was enough reason for you, Christine.

      Delete
  5. Harry, in The Mirror, is said to be planning on taking Meghan to Cornwall in the future to a vacation spot of his childhood. Also, Meghan is reported to have ended her business relationship as "the face" of the brand, Reitmans. No reports thus far on them attending Easter Services anywhere together though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meghan ended it last December from what I read. Her team have asked Reitmans to stop using her name in their advertising.

      Delete
  6. Charlotte, you don't need to publish this as it is just a question about accessing this new blog. When I want to go to the other blog, all I do is type in Duchess Kate and viola' your blogsite is right there near the top of the page. All I do then is just tap that and I am on the blog. I use my IPhone, btw, so the sidebar access is not available. So, can you make it so when anyone types in Meghan Markle your blogsite is right at the top of the page and easily accessible like the DKB? Otherwise I have to type in madaboutmeghan.blogspot.com every time I want to visit there. Not that it isn't totally worth the effort, :), but I was just hoping for the same convenient access as there is to the DKB. You know what I mean? :)
    Is that doable?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Surfer Girl,

      Unfortunately the blog is not yet indexed on Google, meaning if you search for it, there's no related results. It will probably take a few months at least to get the ranking there. I'm sorry for the inconvenience.

      If this helps at all, if you type in 'Mad About Meghan Twitter', the twitter account shows up and there's a link to the blog there :)

      Delete
    2. Thanks so much Charlotte. Think we will have the ranking in no time. :)
      Thanks for explaining that to me. Very interesting.

      I don't do Twitter. (no surprise) but thank you anyway. I don't mind the extra steps for the interim. It is more than worth it. :)

      Delete
    3. P.S. On second thought, I will type that twitter thing in and see if even I can do it that way. :)

      Delete
    4. I just did a couple of searches for you, surfer girl. Actually, Charlotte's twitter was first, and the facebook page not far down. But nowhere was the blog! I'll search again. :)

      Delete
  7. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/16/day-prince-harry-showed-world-talk-problems/

    He can be such a lovely man.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Such a special moment for Heads Together and very, very brave of Harry.

      Delete
    2. He is awesome.

      Delete
    3. I agree - great step from him. I have to say that I was very saddened to hear that he went for so long with such huge bottled grief in him. Why didn't Charles send him to counselling as soon as it happened ? It is heartbreaking to think about a 13 year old trying to figure out what just happened to him all by himself in a boarding school with no one to talk to.

      Delete
    4. It's dreadfully sad, I suspect counselling much earlier on would have helped. Thankfully, he seems to be in a very good place now and feeling comfortable sharing his experience to help others.

      Delete
    5. He really did a good thing there, didn't he? I even listened to the entire thing. Me, of the short attention span, listened to 29 minutes of Harry talking. Then again it was Harry talking . . . . someone described his voice as warm butterscotch on toast. It is. :)

      Delete
    6. That's funny, bluhare. His voice is very soothing and coupled with his accent. Oh my. :)

      Delete
  8. Eve from Germany17 April 2017 at 08:06

    Just listening to the podcast of Bryony Gordon talking with Prince Harry about mental health. GREAT STUFF, I can tell you. Bravo and kudos to you, Prince Harry!! Glad he sought counselling in the end, I wish more people will follow his example - for their own good!
    Please listen to the podcast, the link is on Charlotte´s "Duchess Kate" twitter account!!

    ReplyDelete