The headlines have been relentless. The nation’s most glamorous sisters-in-law engaged in a monumental catfight. Two princes torn apart by their warring wives, amid tears and tantrums over tiaras. And then last month’s report that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have chosen to ‘split’ from the Cambridges and up sticks to Windsor (they’re currently neighbours at Kensington Palace).
There’s no doubt the recent stories of the Duchess of Sussex and Duchess of Cambridge’s alleged falling-out have been juicy. And yet, has anyone else noticed the pervasive misogyny served up with the daily headlines? ‘Don’t make an enemy of Kate, Meghan, she’ll be top dog one day,’ one (female) Sunday newspaper columnist advised last week, before rounding off with: ‘Driving a wedge between two brothers who have supported each other unflinchingly through tragedy and turbulence is asking for double trouble.’
See also the slew of reports about so-called ‘hysterical’ women; from Kate in tears after a dress fitting, to Meghan’s former PA Melissa Toubati, who ‘quit after six months’ and scenes (since denied) of Kate reportedly chastising her new sister-in-law over the way she speaks to her staff.
It’s perhaps ironic, then, that the story that started this avalanche of rumours was Prince Harry screaming, ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!’ over a dispute about her choice of tiara for her wedding day. Where were the column inches calling out
the prince’s rude behaviour and attitude instead of the endless reports branding his new wife a ‘difficult’ and ‘a diva’? When it comes to royal gossip, there is no smoke without fire. But the reports have proven that, sadly, the age-old narrative of female rivalry still holds appeal. Indeed, there is something fetishistic about the ramped-up reporting of this alleged female rift. Do Meghan and Kate – two different women from very different backgrounds, sure – but ones who only met a year and a half ago, even have enough history to fall out to the monumental degree being suggested? They certainly don’t have the deep-rooted familial bond that ties, for example, two brothers for over 30 years.
Indeed, news reaches Grazia that it is the brothers in this scenario who are said to have suffered a far greater rift. As Katie Nicholl, author of Harry: Life, Loss And Love, explains, ‘My understanding is that Kate and Meghan don’t have that much in common, they’re naturally not that close and are very different. Kate initially tried to make an effort; she invited Meghan over for tea and gave her advice. But the real rift is between the brothers,’ she says. ‘William and Harry are so close that William is one of the few people who can be brutally honest with Harry and he was the one who said to him before Christmas last year, “Don’t you think this is all moving a bit fast?” That did not go down well.’
Nicholl believes there’s an element of misogyny in how people are criticising Meghan’s attitude and ‘Hollywood’ way of doing things, too. One persistent report claims Palace staff are furious about Meghan’s 5am text messages, but as Nicholl points out, ‘If it were a man, he’d be praised for his work ethic. In fact, for a long time, the princes themselves were criticised for their lack of work ethic.’
Interestingly, through all of this the Palace has only uttered one outright denial, following the claim that Kate reprimanded Meghan for being rude to her staff (‘This never happened,’ said a spokesperson). The silence has led some to ask: is it simply more convenient for the Palace to shut down and for the wives to take the hit, to distract from the more serious division between the two princes?
If so, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised: royal women have traditionally struggled tofind a place in a family that protects its own first. According to royal biographer Robert Jobson, ‘The priority is the royal family – always. The blood royals. It always has been and always will be, although the non-royals who enter have to be looked after too.’ What may also be at play, he adds, is that commenting on any story only fans the flames: ‘I think the Palace are quite keen to let things blow over and not get involved.’
‘Meghan has definitely had a baptism by fire,’ says Nicholl. ‘And she might well find this level of scrutiny surprising. But this is the royal family and, actually, sadly very little has changed since the days of Diana. Fergie and Diana were constantly analysed and compared for everything, especially their fashion choices. Eventually, what was once a very close friendship came under pressure.’ Almost two decades after that friendship ended, it seems nothing has changed