ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Harry and the Half-Blood Princess

I was asked for my take on the recent engagement of Prince Harry, so here it is.

The fact that the engagement of Harry Windsor to Suits actress Meghan Markle is an obvious mistake that is likely to end in disaster can be observed in the fact that every media outlet in the UK, who collectively are normally the bitchiest, most skeptical media this side of a Hollywood gossip column, is tripping all over each other in a competition to see who can coo more positively about how an English prince is marrying a divorced, mixed-race American actress who is pushing forty.

(Yes, I know they say she's 36, but if that's actually true, she'll be the first actress ever known to honestly report her age. Hollywood ages are the opposite of reported NBA heights and Democratic poll shares; to get a more accurate estimate, you need to add two or three.)

Think about it. How on Earth did the British media, which has never missed a possible Harry Potter-related headline just happen to miss this one? And yes, I know she will be a duchess, not a princess, that's not the point. The real reason the British media is so happy about Ms Markle instead of the traditional twenty-something English Rose one would have expected is that it can now anoint the couple the symbol of the New Britain, which is Not British, but Afri-Pakistani. About the only thing she is missing is being a Muslim.

The thing one has to keep in mind about all this is that Harry is, for the most part, an idiot. That's not my word, that's a quote from an otherwise fawning article about the man. "Harry was again mortified, more for embarrassing his grandmother again than for what he had brought on himself. Yes, he was an idiot, but Harry has always been a bit of a wild child with a tendency to party harder than most."

Sure, it was idiotic to dress up like a Nazi or party naked in Las Vegas, but surely this time, he's got it right with his older American actress divorcee, right? No red flags there! There was a time, not too long ago, that even a king would have to abdicate in order to marry such a creature, and given how that marriage ended, it's more than a little remarkable that the man's niece blithely granted her royal permission for Prince Harry to follow in his great-uncle's footsteps. In light of her approval, one wonders what would be sufficient to cause that permission to be denied, a history of axe-murdering? Multiple arrests for DUI and prostitution?

Harry is a prime example of a situational alpha who is a low delta at heart, and a delta with some noticeable gamma strains to boot. On the one hand, he's extremely rich, extremely famous, tall, courageous, and better-looking than the average man. On the other, he has always severely underkicked his coverage; he's had a long tendency to involve himself with older, not-very-attractive women. One would expect a "wild child" in his position to have a track record with women that made Leonardo diCaprio's look modest, but if the media is to be believed, Harry has mostly been involved with women who are a bit old, a bit fat, or a bit plain.

There is nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but the pattern is indicative of a deep internal insecurity where women are concerned. And if you doubt my take on the matter, consider this observation from an article about the couple's first post-engagement appearance together.
As they walked around the garden, Meghan could be seen wrapping a protective arm around her fiancé and tenderly patting his back. 'The dramatic thing was that she was leading him, just like a professional dancer leading the amateur on Strictly,' says Judi. 'She was leading the choreography rather than him, which is quite outstanding for a royal couple. She also has this trait of putting her hands on top of this. The person who does this is normally the one in control – she’s leading the game.' 
Interpretation: Harry is a Mama's boy who lost his mother at a young age and has never recovered from the loss. His sociosexual rank is completely out of whack as a result, as he combines elite social rank with infantile sexuality that is desperate for the Lost Mommy. Unless she possesses acute foresight and iron-clad self-discipline, this older actress is most likely going to eat the prince alive and control his life to an extent that will become distasteful to his family, to the public, and eventually, to Harry himself.

That doesn't mean the marriage won't work out. There are stranger combinations that have made true love matches and successfully paired-off for life. It simply means that the odds against that happening are formidable. I would give a 10 percent chance that it doesn't ultimately end in divorce.

And, of course, this doesn't even get into the fact that due to FATCA, as the spouse of an American, Harry Windsor will now have to file an annual tax return with the IRS as a non-resident alien, and any future children with Ms Markle will be Americans subject to the US tax regime. Forget Queen Elizabeth's approval; I can't believe his accountant let him marry the woman.

Labels: ,

182 Comments:

Anonymous forgotmyusername November 28, 2017 4:59 AM  

Harry is just another pathetic white Englishman. A guy in his position should be marrying a beautiful young 21 year old woman. Can these Englishman go any lower. "At least my kids won't be racist!!"

But is his brother William any better? William married the first girl he met at university.

Anonymous SAK November 28, 2017 5:15 AM  

Agreed.

He's 33. What rich, good looking, thirty year old guy who just happens to also be a famous Prince marries someone that is older than him? And a divorcee. Who is not a virgin. And already entering the fertility death age range.

It screams issues and bad judgement. She shouldn't be a date, given his options, let alone a wife.

She might be an actress, but she's no Princess Grace and is nowhere near beautiful enough to explain this craziness.

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 5:20 AM  

But is his brother William any better? William married the first girl he met at university.

Not right away. Remember, the media used to mock her as "Waity Katy". Kate isn't a great beauty, but she strikes me as the sort of wife who is pretty great across the board.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore November 28, 2017 5:23 AM  

This right here:

"Harry is a Mama's boy who lost his mother at a young age and has never recovered from the loss. His sociosexual rank is completely out of whack as a result, as he combines elite social rank with infantile sexuality that is desperate for the Lost Mommy. Unless she possesses acute foresight and iron-clad self-discipline, this older actress is most likely going to eat the prince alive and control his life to an extent that will become distasteful to his family, to the public, and eventually, to Harry himself."

This made me think of an old video of the Duke of Edinburgh holding the infant Charles at a distance. He didn't hold his child close like most parents do.

I'm no expert on these matters but one thing I tend to remain mindful of is the childhood of people. Harry experienced the death of a parent. His father was involved with Camilla. The British tabloids subjecting that family to extreme scrutiny and, once again, the way the Duke of Edinburgh might have interacted with Harry's dad, Prince Charles.

Anonymous trev006 November 28, 2017 5:26 AM  

This thing will probably end in divorce if he's lucky and the Charles-sized destruction of his reputation if he is not.

Honestly, the chick is probably fun in the sack and the royal family saw the opportunity for cheap virtue points. Given how badly pure virgin Diana worked out, it could go either way with the new girl. But I am pessimistic.

Blogger APL November 28, 2017 5:31 AM  

"the engagement of Harry Windsor to Suits actress Meghan Markle"

I thought I recognised her. If in real life she's anything like the part she plays in Suits, She'd drive me absolutely crazy, and not in a good way.

But I wonder if Harvey Weinstein has exercised his presumed right of droit du seigneur in this instance?

Blogger Daniel Paul Grech Pereira November 28, 2017 5:40 AM  

I kinda like Harry. Maybe it's because I'm roughly the same age and a veteran too, but he seems like a decent guy. Hopefully it works out for him.

Anonymous Rocklea November 28, 2017 5:42 AM  

"any future children with Ms Markle will be Americans subject to the US tax regime."

Look at the long game, an american sovereign on the throne given right circumstances. Special relationship.

Anonymous Patron November 28, 2017 5:44 AM  

In light of her approval, one wonders what would be sufficient to cause that permission to be denied

Sadly I believe royal permission is no longer officially required.

Blogger Elizabeth November 28, 2017 5:44 AM  

Her father, Thomas Markle, is Jewish and her first husband, Trevor Engelson, was, too.

Blogger The Observer November 28, 2017 5:46 AM  

Well, it looks as if the English are seeking to drop to a low as prominent as the peak of the empire they once held.

Those who still want to believe in throne and altar would do well to look to a less degenerate royal family for hope.

Anonymous Philipp November 28, 2017 5:48 AM  

"and any future children with Ms Markle will be Americans subject to the US tax regime."

Considering that Vox thinks (with good reasons) that the U.S. will fall apart in 2033 or around that time, I doubt this will be an issue. By the time the children of this marriage will be grown up, the U.S. will likely not exist anymore.

Makes you wonder if Harry's accountant is a Vox Populi reader. ;-)

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 5:51 AM  

About the only thing she is missing is being a Muslim.

(sigh) Small mercies?

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 5:55 AM  

There was a time, not too long ago, that even a king would have to abdicate in order to marry such a creature

(sigh) Oh how times have changed... subjective morality, and all that.
Imagine giving up a throne for a lady, out of nobless oblige.
The ladies today say chivalry is dead.
They may be right.
But it was killed by feminism, in the library, with the candlestick.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:00 AM  

one wonders what would be sufficient to cause that permission to be denied, a history of axe-murdering? Multiple arrests for DUI and prostitution?

Regarding cavorting with illicit ladies of the night, apparently King Edward VII was something of the party machine in Paris.

Dirtie Bertie: the Royal PLAYBOY who took Victorian Paris by storm
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/476490/Dirtie-Bertie-the-Royal-PLAYBOY-who-took-Paris-by-storm

He even is said to have done the nasty with Lady Randolph Churchill - Winston's mother!

Anonymous Dyskord November 28, 2017 6:01 AM  

@8 Harry is behind Williams son and daughter aQnd would fall further behind if they breed again. Also if those kids breed in future he'll drop a few more rungs.
He wont sit the throne barring a national tragedy.
On a side note the royals have bowed to pressure and elimimated primogeniture in favor of absolute primogeniture thus allowing what would be a storied dynasty to be reolaced by whomever the firstborn princess royal allows to catch her eye. Who knows perhaps a century from now the new British King will be the son of an ashkinazi jew or Indian from Bombay or better a Congolese chap she met at University.
One of histories old families and storied bloodlines replaced on the whim of public opinion.

Anonymous Ken November 28, 2017 6:04 AM  

Her father, Thomas Markle, is Jewish and her first husband, Trevor Engelson, was, too.

The royal family are just (((their))) puppets as it is.

Anonymous E. November 28, 2017 6:05 AM  

Red-headed, partially black and Jewish children. Can't wait to see them next to Kate and William's children.

Unrelated: How many movies and miniseries do you think this will inspire?

Blogger The Observer November 28, 2017 6:08 AM  

Imagine giving up a throne for a lady, out of nobless oblige.

Proper noblesse oblige would have demanded he restrain his lusts for the good of his kingdom, his line, and his people. At the very least.

But then, we all remember how Anglicanism came to be.

Anonymous CC November 28, 2017 6:09 AM  

Wasn't it also alleged that Wallis Simpson was a transsexual? That would've gone down well today.

Good analysis btw.

Anonymous Hapax Legomenon November 28, 2017 6:12 AM  

I was a little worried at worse, having confused him with William, but it turns out he's only 5th in line for the Throne of Scones.

"Prince Henry of Wales (33) KCVO, familiarly known as Prince Harry, is the younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Diana, Princess of Wales. At the time of his birth, he was third in line of succession to the British throne, after his father and elder brother, but is currently fifth in line after his father, his elder brother, and his nephew and niece, George and Charlotte."

Blogger Samuel Nock November 28, 2017 6:15 AM  

This must be coincidental rather than anything intentional, but note that, at 36, she is the same age as Diana was when she died. This girl is taking the place of his mother.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:19 AM  

The 'interpretation' bit in italics, Vox, is that yours or a quote from somebody else?

Seems to be a lot of interpretation for one glimpse of a 30-second walking-around-in-the-garden situation.

One suspects to get a real insight one would have to go a bit more intimately than that.

Not that it really matters - in a game of Crusader Kings II playing as William, I would simply be figuring out how to poison the bastard or otherwise fuck him over so he doesn't cause trouble later on when daddy King Charles kicks the bucket!

I think as far as Game goes, the old "I'm an actual honest-to-God soldier Prince" is a bit of a trump card to play, I would imagine.

I heard a story from a guy who was a Formula 1 driver. He was putting moves on this chick at a bar, trying everything he knew, to get things going with her. All to no avail. Eventually he gave up and said he was going home, got to go to work tomorrow. "What do you do for work?" she says.

30 minutes later he was screwing her.

Anonymous Dyskord November 28, 2017 6:23 AM  

@18 E
I think you're right next year we'll probably see half a dozen royal dramas based on inter racial love.
King Henry VIII and the preposterously situated black british woman he could never have due to the raciss British Patriarchy or conversely they'll make Anne Boleyn a black women because history is subjective.
Or King George X the first fully African British King with a black royal family ruling over a progressive and peaceful advanced British society with a Pakistani Prime Minister as his greatest ally. A parallel universe story.

The SJW horde are nothing if not predictable

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 28, 2017 6:28 AM  

When I first heard that Harry was dating this gal some time ago I was at first aghast, but then I realized that it was almost inevitable in The Current Year. I mean really, a prince of Cuckland (from which my ancestors hail) dating (and now marrying) a mulatto American. It almost had to happen in this timeline. As mentioned, it's only a miracle that she isn't a muzzie. But there's time for that so who knows.

Bloody hell.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:30 AM  

Proper noblesse oblige would have demanded he restrain his lusts for the good of his kingdom, his line, and his people. At the very least.

Yes but I'm talking about the Bertie Wooster sort of variety.

A Muslim sultan would never do it - he'd just chuck her in the harem with the rest.

It's a sort of noblesse oblige, isn't it?

Not being a nobleman myself it's all Greek to me.

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 28, 2017 6:31 AM  

And the worst part of this may be the bliss that it provides to the SJ crowd. They have to be in ecstasy over this. Blech.

Blogger Sillon Bono November 28, 2017 6:31 AM  

forgotmyusername wrote:But is his brother William any better? William married the first girl he met at university.

Ironically I know more couples who married in the same manner and are still married 25 years later than these who married their 3rd or 4rd girlfriend.

Blogger Howard Stone November 28, 2017 6:32 AM  

Yeah, well the Royal family has a lot o skeletons in their closets, why would the princes be immune to their own genetic predispositions? How much of this engagement is keeping up appearances? She is female, check, she is an adult, check, and she’s an actress, double check.

Blogger Sillon Bono November 28, 2017 6:33 AM  

VD wrote:But is his brother William any better? William married the first girl he met at university.

Not right away. Remember, the media used to mock her as "Waity Katy". Kate isn't a great beauty, but she strikes me as the sort of wife who is pretty great across the board.


I could be wrong here but William's marriage feels to me more authentic than his mum and the ears.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:35 AM  

But then, we all remember how Anglicanism came to be.

Yes - Henry VIII - not big on giving up thrones for ladies, if my memory serves me correctly.

Anonymous Clownworld UK November 28, 2017 6:36 AM  

At least their kids will be Chosen People.

Blogger Howard Stone November 28, 2017 6:37 AM  

Now we’ll never get Mary Beard to shut up.

Blogger SteelPalm November 28, 2017 6:42 AM  

@10 Elizabeth

Her father, Thomas Markle, is Jewish

It's funny how many people mindlessly quoted this in later comments and ran with it, although 5 seconds of research reveals it to be absolute bullshit.

Her father Thomas Markle is of Dutch and Irish ancestry, and going further back, to English nobility. She is actually distantly related to Prince Harry through her father's side;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_Markle#Ancestry

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 28, 2017 6:45 AM  

Honestly it could be a hell of a lot worse.

Have you seen what the rest of European royalty are marrying these days?

It's like they hauled a trailer park and proposed to whatever crawled out of the net. (*apologies to Terry Pratchett*)

Blogger Amy November 28, 2017 6:47 AM  

He was rumored to be the bastard of Hewitt but never proven. Looks enough like Charles anyway. Maybe they did a paternity and said ok, marry her, because you know you’re not in this clan anyway.

Kate is expecting her third child. Long line of succession there. Great analysis and commentary.

Blogger Silly but True November 28, 2017 6:48 AM  

I noted two odd things in my trip to London:
1. All the pro-Barack Obama political advertisements;
2. Lack of English people

It's not Harry's fault. A 40-year-old American half-white divorcee is the best he can do in Khan's London.

Blogger Ian Miguel Martin November 28, 2017 6:49 AM  

"At least my kids won't be racist!!"
Kek. The world has never been lacking in anti-black mulattoes, quadroons, and octoroons. There are entire nations of such.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:50 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger SteelPalm November 28, 2017 6:50 AM  

@36 (*apologies to Terry Pratchett*)

Given that Pratchett was always a SJW type and his last few books became full-fledged SJW monstrosities, is he really worth apologizing to?

Speaking of which, it's off-topic, but Vox, have you heard of the SJW convergence in the Magic:The Gathering community and their present attack against a right-wing MtG personality?

Blogger Koanic November 28, 2017 6:51 AM  

Good to see the Egypt-Nubia royal cycle still holds on both sides of the Atlantic. Atlantis didn't sink between the waves, it just browned between the sheets.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 6:55 AM  

Sillon Bono wrote:forgotmyusername wrote:But is his brother William any better? William married the first girl he met at university.

Ironically I know more couples who married in the same manner and are still married 25 years later than these who married their 3rd or 4rd girlfriend.


Oh, the delicious irony of it all!

Blogger Anchorman November 28, 2017 6:57 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Anchorman November 28, 2017 7:01 AM  

He's marrying an older (he's 33), well-banged, divorced actress?

Good grief.

The Brit press loves this for three reasons.

First, it plays into the Narrative that women in their 30s can still "stick the landing."
Second, they can play the angle, "Harry is a true millennial by not carrying about what his children look like."
Three, when this marriage melts down and he learns even a prince gets turned away in bed by an American woman who pines for Alpha, the press will make a fortune on the scandals.

Blogger Elizabeth November 28, 2017 7:01 AM  

@35 - SteelPalm:
Multiple sites wrote that her father was Jewish, but I found another that said that he wasn't. Her first husband was Jewish.

Bit touchy, eh?

Anonymous noDreamer November 28, 2017 7:05 AM  

Tommy Sotomayor is going to have a field day with this. All we will hear for the next decade is:

1. All the drama associated with her trying to get pregnant.

2. Her getting pregnant.

3. How her (genetically 1/10th?) black children (who will look just about as white as any white kid most likely) are dealing with "being black" in the palace, and how the English people are going to have to "come to terms" with their own racism. This will be said even if the kids are redheads, freckled and/or have green eyes.



Anonymous CC November 28, 2017 7:07 AM  

Maybe they did a paternity and said ok, marry her, because you know you’re not in this clan anyway.

I read Harry wanted to do one, but the Queen overruled it saying a royal shouldn't have to prove themselves like that to the public. She probably had an inkling.

I remember really enjoying Harry's antics back in the day. He comes across like a nice guy too.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:10 AM  

This thing about how, if you're aren't marrying a woman who's 100% white, you're a cuck, is a bit stupid to be honest.

It's one thing to be against mass immigration, and another to be requiring racial purity.

Anybody who said I were a cuck if I married somebody not 100% white, would be a dirty piece of scum.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:11 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:13 AM  

Tommy Sotomayor is going to have a field day with this. All we will hear for the next decade is:

What are you on about?

Tommy is Alt Lite or as about as close to Alt Right as a negro can get.

He's associated with Gavin McInness and Jesse Lee Peterson.

He ain't no SJW.

He's an 'Uncle Tom', 'house negro', 'Oreo cookie' and 'coconut'.

Blogger SteelPalm November 28, 2017 7:14 AM  

@46 Elizabeth

Multiple sites wrote that her father was Jewish, but I found another that said that he wasn't.

You've already been exposed as a liar, "Elizabeth", but I will humor you. Link me to one of these "multiple sites" that indicates Thomas Markle is Jewish, instead of Dutch/Irish?

Bit touchy, eh?

One of the go-to responses when liars have been called out, eh?

Blogger CM November 28, 2017 7:14 AM  

--1. All the drama associated with her trying to get pregnant.

2. Her getting pregnant.

3. How her (genetically 1/10th?) black children (who will look just about as white as any white kid most likely) are dealing with "being black" in the palace, and how the English people are going to have to "come to terms" with their own racism. This will be said even if the kids are redheads, freckled and/or have green eyes.--

And Kate will be on #5 HG Pregnancy with 4 princlings in tow and gets all the attention...

Blogger U PC BRO? November 28, 2017 7:17 AM  

Power play by royal family. In U.S., hordes of not-Americans who have arrived post 1965 and don't give a fuck about our history are trying to tear down our monuments, piss on our founders, etc.

Royals have to be worrying a bit that all of the not-British that have swamped the UK could start questioning why this family of privileged whiteys lives high on the hog - not to mention all of the white nobility who own so much of the prime real estate whilst so many of the "new British" live in shitty, dilapidated housing estates. So let's marry this throwaway playboy Prince to a black (but not too black) woman to try and convince the horde that the Saxe Coburg-Gothas are just like everybody else.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:17 AM  

You've already been exposed as a liar, "Elizabeth", but I will humor you. Link me to one of these "multiple sites" that indicates Thomas Markle is Jewish, instead of Dutch/Irish?

(yawn). Who gives a flying fuck?

Prince Philip is a Greek for the sake of Fuck.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:18 AM  

Power play by royal family.

Power play by Prince Harry's cock, is all.

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 28, 2017 7:20 AM  

Harry is a prime example of a situational alpha who is a low delta at heart, and a delta with some noticeable gamma strains to boot. On the one hand, he's extremely rich, extremely famous, tall, courageous, and better-looking than the average man. On the other, he has always severely underkicked his coverage; he's had a long tendency to involve himself with older, not-very-attractive women.

Interestingly this is not without precedent.

Edward IV married Elizabeth Woodville who was not only older than he was but had two sons already. And he was a king back when that really mattered.

Politically, it was a very stupid decision at a time when Edward couldn't afford to be stupid. Henry VI was still alive and wanted his old job back (or rather his wife did).

Edward's marriage to Elizabeth did nothing but piss off his allies.

I was curious as to why he did it and now I think it came down a withdrawal of maternal affection at a very young age.

Anonymous Looking Glass November 28, 2017 7:24 AM  

Harry's grand-uncle made the same mistake. And his uncle basically made the same mistake.

Clearly, there's a problem that runs in this family. How his older brother married well is still amazing.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:24 AM  

By the way to all you retards who think if you don't have a racially pure marriage you're a 'cuck', did you know that the European royalty were very pure marriers for a long time and that it resulted in the aristocracy (the word aristocracy means 'rule by the best') being in-bred?

Hence marrying outside a certain family circle is not such a bad thing.

Did you know that cross-breed dogs live longer and have less genetic diseases?

This racial purity thing is stupid.

Blogger Harambe November 28, 2017 7:24 AM  

Groggy wrote:You've already been exposed as a liar, "Elizabeth", but I will humor you. Link me to one of these "multiple sites" that indicates Thomas Markle is Jewish, instead of Dutch/Irish?

(yawn). Who gives a flying fuck?

Prince Philip is a Greek for the sake of Fuck.


Dude, stop sighing and yawning and shit. Seriously. Go make yourself a cup of coffee or something.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:25 AM  

Harry's grand-uncle made the same mistake. And his uncle basically made the same mistake.

Everybody's a Monday Morning Prince.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:28 AM  

Dude, stop sighing and yawning and shit. Seriously. Go make yourself a cup of coffee or something.

Who gives a flying fuck?

Prince Philip is a Greek for the sake of Fuck.

Anonymous aegis-1080 November 28, 2017 7:29 AM  

There's also the female angle, that is very underplayed. Only seen one comment mentioning, but this aberration will be used by city-dwelling basic bitches (hmm, wonder who writes on the media) as undeniable proof that The Wall is not a thing and the Cock Carrousel doesn't disqualify women.

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 28, 2017 7:33 AM  

@Groggy

Dude, the limit as laid down by Vox is three comments. You've made sixteen.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:33 AM  

Harry's grand-uncle made the same mistake. And his uncle basically made the same mistake.

Clearly, there's a problem that runs in this family.


They must have inherited the "follow your dick" gene.

I must say I have never ever observed that phenomenon outside of this particular royal family.

It is utterly unique in all of human history!

Extraordinary.

Blogger sconzey November 28, 2017 7:34 AM  

You keep referring to the Queen's 'approval', but I thought it very interesting that the press release said Harry had sought permission from Ms Markle's parents, but merely "informed" the Queen & his family.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:36 AM  

Dude, the limit as laid down by Vox is three comments. You've made sixteen.

Oh come on, it's all a bit of fun.

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 7:41 AM  

"any future children with Ms Markle will be Americans subject to the US tax regime."

Any future children with Markle will be part niglet. (And what of regression to the mean?!) GRANTED, the chances of Harry or his offspring every getting close to the throne have pretty much disappeared with William's production of multiple heirs. BUT, with the one-drop rule and royals marrying royals across Europe -- he will have introduced a stain (oops, typo: a strain) of non-White blood into the bloodlines.

Maybe some sort of English sense will reassert itself, and, as with Princess Anne's kids with Mark Williams -- they are NOT royal. (And I believe not supported on the tax rolls.)

Blogger JaimeInTexas November 28, 2017 7:43 AM  

Had the queen not given permission to wed, then what?

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 7:44 AM  

@14 "But it was killed by feminism, in the library, with the candlestick."

Nah,it was killed by stupidity in the uni square with a stampede!

Blogger Hunsdon November 28, 2017 7:45 AM  

Can we trust The Forward's Jewdar?

https://forward.com/schmooze/372756/is-meghan-markle-going-to-be-prince-harrys-jewish-princess/

Anonymous Rocklea November 28, 2017 7:46 AM  

"Had the queen not given permission to wed, then what?"

An even betterer mini series?

Blogger Salt November 28, 2017 7:48 AM  

Marrying an American actress? So Harry is going Hollywood, perhaps angling for his own game show or starring in a B movie.

Blogger lannes November 28, 2017 7:49 AM  


A couple generations ago she wouldn't have been hired as a maid by the royal family.

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 7:50 AM  

@25 "I think you're right next year we'll probably see half a dozen royal dramas based on inter racial love."

Not a Doctor Who fan then, eh? They already HAD a slovenly, low-class-accented, flat-out black "Queen Elizabeth the ...16th" or something... saving the Brits on their "space-whale ship" and later trading barbs with River Song.

Britain is lost.

Blogger Lazarus November 28, 2017 7:50 AM  

From the algemeiner, (fastest growing jewish nespaper in America) May 18th.

The Church of England has ruled that Prince Harry can marry his American actress girlfriend Meghan Markle at London’s historic Westminster Abbey, despite her being both a divorcee and having a “Jewish background,” the UK’s Express newspaper reported on Sunday.

A Westminster Abbey spokesman said: “The Abbey follows the General Synod Ruling of 2002. Since then it has been possible for divorced people to be married in the Church of England.”

The spokesman also confirmed that Meghan’s ethnic background would not prevent her from having an “interfaith” marriage there.


The mystery deepens. I thought she could not be Jewish if her mother is not Jewish. Doria Radland is her mother. She is supposedly a dreadlock-american.

Maybe Ms. Markle's agent told her that if she identified as Sephardic she would get more roles.

Blogger Erynne November 28, 2017 7:51 AM  

She doesn't look like she's hit the wall yet, at least in comparison with other women her age. Perhaps its the glamour, or the makeup, but she is very pretty, I can't see how she could be considered Plain Jane, but to each their own.

Blogger Dangeresque November 28, 2017 7:53 AM  

"Harry is a Mama's boy who lost his mother at a young age and has never recovered from the loss. His sociosexual rank is completely out of whack as a result, as he combines elite social rank with infantile sexuality that is desperate for the Lost Mommy."

Mama burns the coal, multiple generations pay the toll.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 7:55 AM  

Britain is lost.

Because an English prince, who is not in line to be the king, married an American actress who wasn't 100% 'white'? (but probably 90% white at least)?

She's probably more white than Vox Day.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 7:56 AM  

Magic?
That sucks. Wish I hadn't read that, lol.
Oh well. People will resist of Magic will be wrecked. Same as everything else I guess.

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 7:56 AM  

@49 "I read Harry wanted to do one, but the Queen overruled it saying a royal shouldn't have to prove themselves like that to the public. She probably had an inkling."

An inkling? THIS queen?!

She probably did the DNA test when he was still in diapers! And no matter what it turned up -- she managed the whole matter to protect "The Firm."

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 7:56 AM  

I think as far as Game goes, the old "I'm an actual honest-to-God soldier Prince" is a bit of a trump card to play, I would imagine.

You completely missed the point. Yes, it is an excellent trump card. Which is why the fact that he consistently dated less attractive woman than one might expect, and is marrying a divorced American actress who isn't particularly attractive is informative with regards to his sociosexual rank.

And if you don't stop trying to play self-appointed defense attorney for the Jewish people, you'll be spammed. Knock it off.

Blogger Lazarus November 28, 2017 7:59 AM  

She has dogs. Her Majesty's corgis like her. (They bark at Harry).

This is a good sign.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 8:01 AM  

"Breaking news nigga! This royal halfbreed hooligan done gone and act a fool again."
I can't wait for those.
I pray for his safety.
He may be the most courageous Red Pill/Antifeminist figure. I am surprised he has not been murdered, since he is dealing with the most emotional, unstable, and destructive bunch of detractors ever.

Blogger Arthur Isaac November 28, 2017 8:01 AM  

Groggy thinks he's mad his way to The Sun commentary.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 8:02 AM  

a divorced American actress who isn't particularly attractive

That's where I disagree, she looks incredibly hot to my eyes.
I think people who are whitey whitey like me prefer girls who are a bit darker.
People who are a bit darker prefer whitey whitey girls.
May be some sort of evolved instinct for a modicum of cross-breeding and to stay away from incest, to stay away from girls who too closely resembled sisters or mothers.

Note both the young fair princes went for darker girls - not like their mother.

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 8:03 AM  

Oh come on, it's all a bit of fun.

Boredom is all a bit of fun, Groggy? Dishonest rhetoric utilized in an attempt to play thought police will never fly here. Again, knock it off.

Blogger Koanic November 28, 2017 8:06 AM  

> She's probably more white than Vox Day.

In terms of the relevant metric, genetic distance, I seriously doubt that. Africans are a separate species.

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 8:06 AM  

@57 "Harry's grand-uncle made the same mistake. And his uncle basically made the same mistake.

Clearly, there's a problem that runs in this family. How his older brother married well is still amazing."

I doubt there's a chance in ... Kensington... that princlings can be raised even semi-normal! If anything, WIlliam's apparent normality should (?) be credited to Diana -- who worked VERY hard to give her sons as close to a normal childhood as she could. Poor old jug-ears (who, you'll notice is ALSO hooked, and always was, to the older, seemingly maternal woman he finally got to marry after Diana died) had nothing at all like a normal childhood!

William, as the older son (he was 15), may have gotten more "protection"; been better "formed," before Diana died. Harry was still quite young (12) when she died. Think of 'formative' years, in a pretty pathological household situation. (And with the insanely trouble marriage of their parents, followed by the violent death of their mother - AND having to 'act out' their grief on the world stage......)

Blogger Thomas Henderson November 28, 2017 8:06 AM  

Elizabeth II, when a princess, married her first love, Philip Mountbatten, and they have recently celebrated a platinum (70th) anniversary. Princess Margaret was the wild and unstable sister and fell in loved with a divorced man, Peter Townsend. In those days the Anglican Church was still a branch of traditional Christianity and the Queen did not permit the match.

Prince William married his first love and now they are set to beget their third child. Prince Harry, the wild and unstable brother, is now to marry a divorced woman. The Anglican Church, not being what it use to be, the Queen is allowing this match.

As someone who lives in a Commonwealth country, Canada, I thank God for the Queen we have and that William is heir after his father. Providence has been kind so far, but like every family, the wheat is mixed with the tares. And we still have to contend with the Cornwalls (Charles and Camilla) before we get to the Cambridges (William and Kate).

Must say, Harry has been a bit of a disappointment. Glad he is no longer the spare.

Good analysis Vox.

Long live the Queen!

Blogger Ransom Smith November 28, 2017 8:06 AM  

Prince Philip is a Greek for the sake of Fuck
Price Philip is as Greek as I am.
Which is to say he's German.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 8:09 AM  

Africans are a separate species.

A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction.

By the common definition, they aren't a separate species.

Anonymous Avalanche November 28, 2017 8:11 AM  

@58 This racial purity thing is stupid.

Someone hit a sore spot here with you, Groggy?
Comment after comment after comment.... hmmmm?

I'd just add: it's not "we can't achieve 100% purity so --- WTH! Everyone into the pool!"

It's: "we can't achieve 100% purity, but we can try for it as much as we can; you got a pool pass?"

Blogger Koanic November 28, 2017 8:13 AM  

Why don't you continue quoting the Wikipedia definition of species, Groggy? Does it happen to grow inconvenient for your position in the very next sentence? What a shocker that would be.

Blogger SteelPalm November 28, 2017 8:15 AM  

@79 WynnLloyd

Mister Metokur covered the SJW infestation of Magic:The Gathering fairly well on the first part of his stream;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQJI-5J_yw

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 8:16 AM  

By the common definition, they aren't a separate species.

No, they are a separate sub-species. This is not news here. Now stop defending your subpar sexual selection choice.

Blogger Sean Carnegie November 28, 2017 8:19 AM  

Has anyone Makeapp-ed Ms. Markle?

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 8:19 AM  

Why don't you continue quoting the Wikipedia definition of species, Groggy? Does it happen to grow inconvenient for your position in the very next sentence? What a shocker that would be.

While this definition is often adequate, when looked at more closely it is problematic. For example, with hybridisation, in a species complex of hundreds of similar microspecies, or in a ring species, the boundaries between closely related species become unclear. Other ways of defining species include similarity of DNA, morphology or ecological niche.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 28, 2017 8:23 AM  

I just wished Harry would tell the world he is marrying a young fertile woman who he will keep at home and pregnant.

Women the world over would he aghast, loud and obnoxious and then go back to dreaming about them being the spouse of Harry.

Women are silly

Anonymous Niggapls November 28, 2017 8:24 AM  

“Anybody who said I were a cuck if I married somebody not 100% white, would be a dirty piece of scum.”

Groggy kids dindu nuffin, fam.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 28, 2017 8:26 AM  

If only the term "good breeding" would make a comeback.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 8:28 AM  

Groggy kids dindu nuffin, fam.

The correct term is 'nut megging', as I have been educated recently.

Anonymous Überdeplorable Psychedelic Cat Grass November 28, 2017 8:33 AM  

She's pretty BUT DIVORCED! Never marry a divorced woman. Solid analysis Vox.

Anonymous Niggapls November 28, 2017 8:36 AM  

It will turn out Harry’s wife’s black son really wuz kangs.

Anonymous Causal Lurker November 28, 2017 8:36 AM  

Well, THIS totally destroys the sobriquet of "The Black Prince." Edward died young, but otherwise would have his choice of the finest daughter available because of his military exploits and dynastic propsects. Harry had exemplary service but settled for someone who looks like she was beaten moderately with a homely stick. It's hard to tell with that much pancake on her face (please Lord, let that photo be with makeup).

If Harry wanted to play Bad Boy, why not marry an O'Neill daughter and place Irish Catholic children (of the ruling clan) that close to the throne? Now, there's drama for the 900th anniversary of the Anglo-Norman invasion.

Thomas Henderson - The Head of House Windsor is allowing the match; interesting phrase. I wonder what's now disallowed as inheritance or income? No one outside the family may know this for some time.

Anonymous ReVengeance November 28, 2017 8:36 AM  

A divorced American actress. Hell, at that point dindu doesn't really make that much of a difference.

Blogger Anchorman November 28, 2017 8:39 AM  

Dude, the limit as laid down by Vox is three comments. You've made sixteen.

What limit?

Anonymous Ken November 28, 2017 8:45 AM  

@18 They have already started with the film Victoria and Abdul about Queen Vicky's 'friendship' with some shitskin.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine November 28, 2017 8:51 AM  

@ReVengeance, true, it's just an extra onus at that point.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd November 28, 2017 8:55 AM  

Groggy wrote:Africans are a separate species.

A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction.

By the common definition, they aren't a separate species.


If wolves, dogs and coyotes are separate species (all can interbreed, and often do), then Whites, Asians and Africans are separate species (though all can interbreed, and often do).

I wouldn't quibble with calling them subspecies, either.

Blogger Groggy November 28, 2017 8:58 AM  

I wouldn't quibble with calling them subspecies, either.

Sub-species are when you can identify them as part of that group with high probability.

So if you can tell them apart visually, then they are subspecies - that is the definition I have heard.

You can tell a white human and a black human apart ~ 100 % of the time, therefore they are sub-species.

However the same would apply for other races which were sufficiently different i.e. Amerindians and Orientals, etc.

Anonymous TheTruthIsNeverAcceptable November 28, 2017 9:12 AM  

Groggy obviously works for you...

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 9:14 AM  

Sub-species are when you can identify them as part of that group with high probability.

Sub-species are genetically distinct branches of the same species. For example, sub-Saharan Africans are pure Homo sapiens sapiens. Europeans, Asians, and Pacific Islanders are not, being various combinations of two or three different species, Homo sapiens, Homo Neanderthalus, and Homo Denisova.

Anonymous BBGKB November 28, 2017 9:15 AM  

The Ginger Prince and the Niggerette princess. I guess you guys missed the black male Prince Ess on the show magicians. Did they ever do a DNA test to make sure his mudsharking mom didn't cheat on Prince Cuck?

I would give a 10 percent chance that it doesn't ultimately end in divorce.

Are you accounting for her being killed off counting as divorce?

He's marrying an older (he's 33), well-banged, divorced actress?

There was a show called Marry Harry that had a red head farmer who looked like Harry and lots of gold diggers.

I think people who are whitey whitey like me prefer girls who are a bit darker.

You have been watching too much (((MUST SEE TV))) shoahs

Dude, the limit as laid down by Vox is three comments. You've made sixteen.

I thought the only limit was the number of ooooooo's in jooo

Blogger Koanic November 28, 2017 9:17 AM  

> I wouldn't quibble with calling them subspecies, either.

The difference between sub-Saharans and the rest of the world is so large that it should be a species difference. Neanderthals should be one too. Non sub-Saharan extant races would then be sub-species, except maybe the Aboriginals. Calling them all sub-species is obvious chicanery. E.g. IIRC the Tasmanians went extinct due to inability to interbreed. And half the aboriginals. This is from Jim of Jim's Blog.

Blogger Cecil Henry November 28, 2017 9:24 AM  


Schadenfreude is a ugly motive:... barely disguised by the SJW's.

Envy loves a fall. But its still a loss, and still destructive.

Because race matters...And people are right to care about race, their genetic inheritance, and the properties their children and future society will have.

BASIC truth

The Royal family have made such contemptible fools of themselves that one can only hope the monarchy ends soon. They have said NOTHING about the invasion of their nation, but Prince Charles coos endless about preserving ethnic identity in any corner of the world outside his own. Despicable. But Prince Harry is just cringe worthy.

Anonymous Conservative Voter November 28, 2017 9:27 AM  

"> I wouldn't quibble with calling them subspecies, either."

We're all one race, dude. The human race.

Anonymous Gouv November 28, 2017 9:34 AM  

If you marry a girl who is not completely white, you're a cuck.

Anonymous Gouv November 28, 2017 9:36 AM  

You can just marry a white commoner and that will fix the problem of inbreeding, you dumbass motherfucker. Goddamn you're cucked as fuck.

Anonymous Kat November 28, 2017 9:47 AM  

Can we please go back to when royals used to flaunt their mistresses around town? It might not have been chaste, but it at least reinforced that some women weren't wife material.

Anonymous SAK November 28, 2017 9:55 AM  

I think people who are whitey whitey like me prefer girls who are a bit darker.

I thought the consensus of pretty much every subset of men grouped by own skin tone was:

1) Whitey white blondes
2) Whitey white brunettes
3) Mediterrainian brunettes
...not entirely clear...
Last) Black women.

I've never heard of this whitey white love of darker women and I have known plenty of pasty white men over the years.

But I can't claim to have seen any science on this. So who knows?

Blogger Koanic November 28, 2017 10:00 AM  

The culling of 90 IQ Neanderthal-influenced North American Native Americans has in my opinion occurred too rapidly to reclaim valuable mutations into core Eurasia, and high performing specimens such as the Days should be left alone. If you want to worry about devolution, focus your attention on the geyser of sewage bespattering the world from sub-Saharan Africa.

Blogger MadMax 1861 November 28, 2017 10:00 AM  

@114 Koanic
"The difference between sub-Saharans and the rest of the world is so large that it should be a species difference. Neanderthals should be one too. Non sub-Saharan extant races would then be sub-species, except maybe the Aboriginals. Calling them all sub-species is obvious chicanery. E.g. IIRC the Tasmanians went extinct due to inability to interbreed. And half the aboriginals. This is from Jim of Jim's Blog."
Read the comments below the article:
https://blog.jim.com/science/tasmanian-aboriginal-skull/

Blogger Theproductofafineeduction November 28, 2017 10:03 AM  

More if Grouv is actually Groggy also.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 10:04 AM  

Thanks!!!

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 10:08 AM  

Lol!

Blogger Jeff Weimer November 28, 2017 10:19 AM  

Kate is conventionally attractive, just about the archetype of such.

And that is just about perfect for the role she's in.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 10:24 AM  

My understanding (which may not be correct) is that only the San and San-related peoples are Homo sapiens sapiens . Congoids ("classic" negroids) have 2-4% admixture from an unstated species, in the same way that Caucasians and Asians have 2-4% of their DNA coming from the Neanderthal species.
The problem is that no one will identify the species that Congoids partially descend from. Most anthropologists I've talked to (who are not opposed to this sort of evolutionary biology) are adamant that it is a late-era population of either H. erectus or H. ergaster, given the region. Of course, if you look at a reconstruction of Erectus you can see the similarities in facial features. It isn't just a mean-spirited slam; prognathism is a major feature of Erectus, which is not present in any other race. I invite anyone who is more knowledgeable to interject.

Regardless of all of that, "mixed-race" and "half-black" aren't equivalent. If he had a Chinese wife, it might be a dilution of the royal blood, and might still be seen as a betrayal by some, but it wouldn't create the same sense of revulsion that marriages to Congoids do. Same with Hispanics, who are usually acceptable as marriage partners to whites in a lot of instances. It's not common for white/Hispanic marriages to produce revulsion. I would imagine a girl who is half-Mexican wouldn't be controversial at all. Even a darker Central American girl, like a Mayan, would be acceptable to many more people than a black/white marriage, which triggers the greatest sense of disgust, which seeks to be universal among non-negroid peoples.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 28, 2017 10:24 AM  

Thanks. Looks interesting.

Blogger Rez Zircon November 28, 2017 10:29 AM  

@34 This is a job for Infogalactic...
(which today is giving me a 504-gateway-timeout)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meghan_Markle&diff=812562263&oldid=812559588

"Ancestry: This entire section is unnecessary, racist, and grotesque. Delete it." And lo, it was deleted and removed from public view.

On the bright side, at her age children are increasingly unlikely, and suddenly I'm wondering if the heirs in line ahead of him are quietly nodding and saying to themselves, "Good, that many fewer potential problems should, God forbid, the crown devolve to Harry."

Blogger g wood November 28, 2017 10:34 AM  

Markle can easily renounce her American citizenship, if that's a problem.

Blogger MendoScot November 28, 2017 10:38 AM  

Seen on Twitter:

By marrying Meghan Markle, Prince Harry is essentially colonising a woman of colour in a racist, imperialist way. Much the same way as the imperialists of old colonised Africa. His status + power + privilege makes it nonconsensual

Blogger Arthur Isaac November 28, 2017 10:57 AM  

"problematic said the Sun transplant, removing any remaining doubt about his status as an SJW.

Anonymous Leonidas November 28, 2017 10:58 AM  

...it's more than a little remarkable that the man's niece blithely granted her royal permission for Prince Harry to follow in his great-uncle's footsteps.

Since the updates made by the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013, UK law only requires royal permission to marry for the first six in the order of succession. After Kate gives birth, Harry will be #6. So I strongly suspect the conversation went something like this:

HARRY: I'm going to marry this girl.
QE2: No you're not.
HARRY: Well... you can say no now, but I'll just wait until Wills has another baby. You've noticed he's popping them out rather quickly.
WILLIAM: Harry, why'd you bring me into this?
HARRY: Besides, Grandma, you're OLD. And Dad already told me he'd give permission.
CHARLES: Jolly good, old chap. Marry who you like! After all, I did!
QE2: You dolt, Charles, what have you done to our family?
MEGHAN: Does this coat make me look fat?
QE2:

Honestly, Harry probably presented it in a way that gave the queen a choice between approving the marriage of a man who will almost certainly never be king anyway or suffering yet another royal scandal. Harry renouncing his status and/or having a love child is a pretty big freaking scandal, even by the standards of the royal family. Add in that QE2 figured she could get some fawning press coverage due to the racial issues, and basically you have a woman playing a bad hand as best as she can.

And, of course, this doesn't even get into the fact that due to FATCA, as the spouse of an American, Harry Windsor will now have to file an annual tax return with the IRS as a non-resident alien...

10 to 1 odds say she's required to renounce her US citizenship as a requirement of the wedding. Prince Philip had to do the same (and renounce his non-British titles) before he could marry Elizabeth. I doubt she'll have any qualms about requiring Meghan to give up her American citizenship. Odds are good that British law requires it anyway and the royal family has no say.

So... I still agree with the large gist of the OP. But I think QE2 has thought this through a bit more than she's currently being given credit for, and is following the path that minimizes damage to the royal family given the idiocy with which said family continues to operate.

Blogger kmbr November 28, 2017 10:58 AM  

I would have never guess she had some darkie in her.

At any rate those kids are going to be white. They will live in the white world and do white things.

The celebrations on black twitter, well, you almost feel bad for them. Almost.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd November 28, 2017 11:02 AM  

Conservative Voter wrote:We're all one race, dude. The human race.

Some species definitely are winners in the human race, and some are definitely losers.

White Privilege means winning the human race.

Blogger Resident Moron™ November 28, 2017 11:34 AM  

“Prince Philip is a Greek for the sake of Fuck”

Do you know why David Niven never received a knighthood?

OpenID pacificbayarea November 28, 2017 11:37 AM  

Marrying Mama, indeed. Compare:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJO0bzdjlng and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyqRSUV2G9A

One might wonder if she was auditioning for the role.

Blogger Glen November 28, 2017 11:49 AM  

Vox,
Your description of Harry matches the historical record of George IV during his youth. As with any marriage, I wish them well. Perhaps they can beat the odds.

Blogger pnq8787 November 28, 2017 11:52 AM  

The statement "There is only one race, the human race!" is patronizing to all the races that are not the race of whoever makes the assertion. Usually it's a white person saying it. Have they considered the possibility that members of the other races actually don't think themselves inferior and actually value the preservation of their own racial phenotype? Saying there is only one race is an insult not only to your own people, but to the other peoples of the world. Whenever I hear that statement I imaging a smug white economically secure liberal who thinks himself or herself secretly superior. I'm picturing an Elizabeth Warren type.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 28, 2017 11:53 AM  

Harry is a prime example of a situational alpha who is a low delta at heart, and a delta with some noticeable gamma strains to boot.

He does have a bit of Gamma face. It's not egregious, but it is noticeable if you compare him to his brother William, who doesn't have it at all.

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella November 28, 2017 12:22 PM  

Princess Kate and Prince Whosis met during what would be high school at a subscription ball or weekend house party. She set her cap for him, waited one year out of university to start with him, and then was his housemate in a large house with other people.

She did a textbook courtship: he waivered, wanting to trollop about in his twenties. She acceded, then made careful to be seen entering parties well-made up, well spray-tanned, well surrounded by handsome young men. Then she would leave whatever social gathering without any photos. All of this was in the newspapers. Prince Whosis was eaten up with jealousy- he could see her enter, see her surrounded by other men, holding a drink, but not drunk, not groping, just smiling. After six months of this, he saw her at a weekend party or wedding. They talked for hours. She emerged with a timeline for commitment and marriage.

Her family has been nothing but polite and illustrious, her siblings have been nothing buy polite. Her parents are not overbearing.

They met before uni.

Anonymous Ages November 28, 2017 12:29 PM  

At least William, the prince who matters, has his head on straight: an attractive, white, British wife, with whom he is pumping out heirs with abandon.

HM probably doesn't care what Harry does, as long as he's less of a screw-up than Charles. He's 5th in line and falling.

Anonymous Ages November 28, 2017 12:31 PM  

kmbr wrote:The celebrations on black twitter, well, you almost feel bad for them. Almost.

This time, they almost really wuz kangs.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab November 28, 2017 1:20 PM  

@129 The infogalactic section is gone as well. Somebody's been a busy bee.

Anonymous Lew Rockwell November 28, 2017 1:21 PM  

British Jeb Bush.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab November 28, 2017 1:37 PM  

@145 whoa now, that's just needlessly cruel. He's done far more for his people than old Jeb ever did. And he'll still be able to speak English at home.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 28, 2017 2:20 PM  

She acceded, then made careful to be seen entering parties well-made up, well spray-tanned, well surrounded by handsome young men. Then she would leave whatever social gathering without any photos. All of this was in the newspapers. Prince Whosis was eaten up with jealousy- he could see her enter, see her surrounded by other men

@141 Ariadne Umbrella
So... beta orbiters are literally tools. Like a peacock's tail feathers.

Blogger vorlos November 28, 2017 2:22 PM  

Harry just gave middle finger to the Alt right, to white identity, history and kin. By bestowing the ancient royalty and "seat of Kings" to the blacks, Harry is the face of the enemy against which we contend. Further, neither he nor his family will suffer the consequences due to wealth, rank and protection. This is not true for the those who mindlessly follow him. He also personally chose a Muslim female as interviewer. This man is anti-west and a destroyer.

Anonymous Andy November 28, 2017 2:40 PM  

The Royal family don't give a fuck what James Hewitts son does.

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 2:44 PM  

The infogalactic section is gone as well. Somebody's been a busy bee.

No, it is not. Check the history. Whatever is there is essentially unchanged.

Anonymous Ages November 28, 2017 2:45 PM  

@148. This man is anti-west and a destroyer.

He may well be anti-west, but he can't destroy anything. At fifth in line and falling, he'll live out his days blacked in some obscure dukedom.

@149. The Royal family don't give a fuck what James Hewitts son does.

Maybe you could say that when he was younger, but he looks far more like Charles than Hewitt.

Blogger vorlos November 28, 2017 2:55 PM  

Ages, by making gross miscegenation with a Hollywood low life he is giving the highest level social approval to this conduct. This massively affects social perception and serves to demoralize and degrade true values and real quality. This is evil and biological leninism in action. Do not discount the debasement of this symbol of England and the west. This is war.

Blogger Montrose November 28, 2017 3:24 PM  

https://www.thejc.com/news/the-diary/meet-misha-nonoo-the-jewish-matchmaker-who-brought-harry-and-meghan-together-1.449219

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr November 28, 2017 3:27 PM  

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that this is a fairly good example of how men, as well as women, age out of the marriage market. The manosphere advises women to marry by 30, preferably earlier. Men also have a "best sold by" date, and it's 32-35. At 33, Harry was running low on options and probably feeling pressured to settle for what he could get.

Anonymous Amstel Light November 28, 2017 3:34 PM  

"You've already been exposed as a liar, "Elizabeth", but I will humor you. Link me to one of these "multiple sites" that indicates Thomas Markle is Jewish, instead of Dutch/Irish? "

She's not Jewish. The Jewish media is lying that she's Jewish, but she's not.

Blogger Anthony November 28, 2017 4:01 PM  

Well, if the Royal Family needs a warrior Prince on the future, having one who's one-quarter black might be an advantage.

Blogger Matamoros November 28, 2017 4:08 PM  

#112: sub-Saharan Africans are pure Homo sapiens sapiens

If that is true how can you explain the dna testing that shows they are barely related to Europeans but largely related to Bonobos?

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11128

Blogger Doom November 28, 2017 4:09 PM  

His taste in women may very easily have been formed by a very naughty nanny. My guess is the general age and look can be obtained by making a rough composite of his known chips. That may have just happened, been a way to fix him from a flaw, or even a way to create a flaw as a younger royal male heir. They are quite British. I guess they didn't want queer, that doesn't work as well, especially if they end up needing him.

Blogger vorlos November 28, 2017 4:17 PM  

Anthony, blacks are not warriors and certainly not in our interests ever. He is as demoralizing as was his nightmare mother.

Anonymous Takin' A Look. November 28, 2017 4:41 PM  

So they're Jewish and cousins to boot. I'm sure Miles Mathis and friends are already sussing out the genealogy.

Blogger Oh My Gawd November 28, 2017 5:20 PM  

Markle will be dominant all right, like Wallis Simpson, and she will dominate any kids out of his red hair gene. But she better hurry up, especially if there are years to be added she is trying to hide.

Blogger weka November 28, 2017 5:26 PM  

Get it right. The Greek royal family was German. He anglicized his name and shortened it to Battenburg, after his uncle, then took the royal name of Windsor... Besides Elizabeth and Philip are cousins, since the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha clan were fertile, and married most non Catholic monarchs.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab November 28, 2017 5:34 PM  

Sorry about the infogalactic mistake.

Blogger Redpill Angel November 28, 2017 6:00 PM  

#151Ages said "He looks far more like Charles than Hewitt." But red hair is recessive. Is there any at all in Charles' line?

There's an obscure book out there written by a woman photographer a while back in which the author theorized that people fall in love because of facial symmetry, facial resemblance, or resemblance to a beloved mother figure. She compared a picture of Charles' nanny with Camilla with amazing results. Wish I could find that book, dang. I note that Harry and Meghan, despite different coloring, have similar ski noses and facial symmetry, imho.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener November 28, 2017 6:12 PM  

Just don't do it, Harry.

Anonymous Crew November 28, 2017 6:46 PM  

It never ceases to amaze how a patently pseudo-intellectual system—the sexual-social hierarchy—is used to explain the glaring mistakes for a man to marry a bi-racial, older, divorced woman, when their impending nuptials is of little or no personal consequence to the detractors. Men, Christian or otherwise, who create and perpetuate that structure make a series of subjective behavioral and personality appraisals as its foundational pieces. Any protestation about this label or refusal to act in the prescribed manner brings about a pejorative response. It may be “convenient” for men to articulate what they believe are definitive aspects of their fellow man’s conduct because they subscribe to this hierarchy, but what about those men who find definitive flaws in how those decisions were arrived? What happens when those men challenge the structure by arguing that the “unvarnished truth of the structure” is in reality a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry? Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and situational alphas?

Blogger VD November 28, 2017 7:53 PM  

Any protestation about this label or refusal to act in the prescribed manner brings about a pejorative response.

That's not true. You can act however you want. But protesting the label is just foolish and accomplishes absolutely nothing. The behaviors are observed. It doesn't matter if they are labeled "gamma" or "pik-pok" or "37".


It may be “convenient” for men to articulate what they believe are definitive aspects of their fellow man’s conduct because they subscribe to this hierarchy, but what about those men who find definitive flaws in how those decisions were arrived?

What about them? They are welcome to construct their own heuristics as they see fit.

What happens when those men challenge the structure by arguing that the “unvarnished truth of the structure” is in reality a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry?

Those men will be publicly humiliated for presenting an irrelevant argument that demonstrates they don't even understand what they are challenging. Your argument is not even wrong. It is a category error. You're arguing about whether the striped animal should be called a zebra or not. But the fact is, we can all see the striped animal and observe that it looks like horse and eats grass instead of meat. There are no assumptions. There is no sophistry. There are observations, heuristics, and a predictive model.

Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and situational alphas?

Again, you're committing a category error. There is no more judgment involved in calling a man a beta or a situational gamma than there is in calling him a prince, an actor, or a man with red hair. Except, of course, for the analytical ability required to correctly match the observation with the label.

As with most labels, the pejorative aspects come from reality, not the label. Remember, "gay" was created as a term of approbation, as was "SJW". Now people complain that they are insults, due to what "gay" and "SJW" genuinely represent.

Ask yourself this question: is it the existence of the socio-sexual hierarchy that offends you or your perception of your own place in it? Because whether you like it or not, whether you believe it should have more or fewer gradations, it most definitely exists. If it didn't, it could not so accurately predict human behavior.

Blogger Nate73 November 28, 2017 8:10 PM  

Even supposing Prince Harry knew all this, how does one even begin to overcome something like that? Sexuality and what you're attracted to doesn't change overnight or trivially.

Blogger Doom November 28, 2017 8:56 PM  

Nate73,

I would guess changes would require a guide, tutor, perhaps sex therapist. God knows they have the money, if also very odd notions. As I have suggested, as a lesser royal male heir they may want him just a touch less sophisticated as a means of limiting his ambitions. Just be glad they didn't bugger him queer for the purpose.

Blogger jdgalt November 28, 2017 9:02 PM  

I suggest an alternative interpretation for why the royal family is encouraging this match: Since the debacle with the Nazi uniform, Prince Harry is regarded as an embarrassment to the family and thus the nation, so they'd really like him to take himself out of the succession. Marrying a foreign divorcee will certainly do that. They probably even promised Harry a meaningless title of nobility, similar to the Dukedom of Windsor that they awarded to King Edward in 1936 when he gave up the crown to marry an American divorcee.

Blogger Sterling Pilgrim November 28, 2017 10:28 PM  

Boy oh Boy are they playing it up...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-42153317

Blogger John rockwell November 28, 2017 11:32 PM  

Why did Henry VIII not have an idea of adopting a worthy adult man as his son like how the Ancient Romans did things?

Blogger Revelation Means Hope November 29, 2017 12:21 AM  

Arthur Isaac wrote:"problematic said the Sun transplant, removing any remaining doubt about his status as an SJW.

Noticed the exact same thing. Good catch.

SJW or larval-SJW?

Blogger WynnLloyd November 29, 2017 12:31 AM  

Damnit.

Blogger Doom November 29, 2017 12:50 AM  

John rockwell,

I believe beside being heavy in the cup, and suffering from syphilis, he didn't have much going by that time. As well, I would guess his daughters, and advisers, played tricks on the old king, vying for power well beforehand. And I don't believe that would have been accepted without war. Female royals are much easier to control. Advisers were licking their chops to "serve" a queen.

Blogger tublecane November 29, 2017 3:49 AM  

@26-No, it doesn't really have anything to do with noblesse oblige, which is the responsibility of royalty, aristocrats, and other "privileged" people to look after the "less fortunate?" Famous and probably well-off American actresses don't count as "less fortunate," though We Now Know they're likely traumatized on the way up.

You may be confusing noblesse oblige with some form of romantic love.

Blogger tublecane November 29, 2017 4:04 AM  

@56-That story lives on in the public imagination, as two recent tv shows--the White Queen and Game of Thrones--are at least partially based on it.

But it doesn't matter as much for Harry, who is a Prince but has close to zero chance of getting to the throne or siring children who will crowned.

Blogger tublecane November 29, 2017 4:07 AM  

@58-When you get beyond marrying your cousins or marrying into families with certain known genetic diseases, there's plenty enough biodiversity within races to not bother with the rest of the world on grounds of genetic hygiene.

The problem with blue bloods wasn't that they married white people. It was that they married other blue bloods.

Blogger tublecane November 29, 2017 4:18 AM  

@88-Charles has faults, which are legion. But he did at least one thing right: he fought the good fight, and won some victories, against abomination of modern architecture.

That's more good than I've seen any royal do in my lifetime.

Blogger Cloom Glue November 29, 2017 8:34 AM  

Nate73 wrote:Even supposing Prince Harry knew all this, how does one even begin to overcome something like that? Sexuality and what you're attracted to doesn't change overnight or trivially.

The knowing of it is the first step in defusing it, and yes it can change overnight, except that many people live a life without introspection, without attempts at untying the knots, without resisting the errors in thought and emotion, like through fasting and praying.

They do not know the biblical message was about this overcoming, and there are other, lesser, incomplete methods; eg. psychological and philosophical.

On the other hand, the models are interesting, like this sexual-social-hierarchy, because they are predictive, but they themselves are not methods of overcoming.

Blogger Ed Bighi November 30, 2017 6:02 AM  

As a fellow American expatriate in Italy, I commend you on mentioning fatca and how Harry will be subject to it's wrath. An English royal subject to fbar and fatca. Classic!

Anonymous Crew November 30, 2017 10:05 AM  

"But protesting the label is just foolish and accomplishes absolutely nothing. The behaviors are observed."

Behaviors interpreted as being other than manly.

"Harry is a prime example of a situational alpha who is a low delta at heart, and a delta with some noticeable gamma strains to boot." That is an assumption made by men (generally) who believe that the sexual-social hierarchy is represents unequivocally a truism. So one constructs an argument based on this set of beliefs, when in reality they are mere assumptions rife with confirmation bias.
That is, a certain set of behaviors constitutes "true manliness"; anything deviating from this preconceived norm by the collective is thus labeled a "beta" or "gamma". Thus, groupthink mandates that a younger man who marries a divorced, mixed race older woman MAY be, as opposed to IS, a making a "mistake", and that she COULD, as opposed to MOST LIKELY, make "mince meat" out of him.

"There is no more judgment involved in calling a man a beta or a situational gamma than there is in calling him a prince, an actor, or a man with red hair. Except, of course, for the analytical ability required to correctly match the observation with the label."

There is a certain number of observable physical characteristics that results in the proper labeling of a man a "prince, an actor, or one who has 'red hair'". When declaring a man to behave like a "gamma", one already has in their mind as what they personally believe, compared to the beliefs of others, In a number of cases, that label is affixed automatically and permanently without even having directly interacted with that man; it is a judgement from afar. Which is fine, but in the end all it remains is an opinion, not fact.

"As with most labels, the pejorative aspects come from reality, not the label."

The label being generated as a result of one's perceived reality.

"is it the existence of the socio-sexual hierarchy that offends you or your perception of your own place in it?"

Courage
Loyalty
Industry
Resiliency
Resolution
Personal Responsibility
Self-Reliance
Integrity
Sacrifice

These virtues are manliness. How man exhibits those virtues in their own life, and whether that exhibition results in a label of "alpha" or "gamma", is up for spirited debate. And, of course, there is truth in that some men are of a "higher" or "lower" status as a result of showing consistently those values in their daily lives, but the interpretation as to whether that status is "better/worse" or "more desirable/less desirable" depends on context.

As far as my "own place" in the hierarchy, the mileage varies. One man may say I'm a gamma for acting in this manner, while another man may say I'm an alpha for acting in that fashion. It's a judgement call, not an absolute truth. I focus on how I conduct myself based on Jesus' definition of manliness, not artificially created ones made by fallen men.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts