
You can't call yourself a duchess then broadcast that video to the world
Dear God please, MAKE IT STOP. What, it has stopped? I think I'd better watch it again, just to – ewwww!
I can confirm the Meghan-in-labour-twerkathon is every bit as awful as they say. Worse, once (or twice) you've had a look it can never be unseen; I feel very cross, highly embarrassed and I genuinely fear it will be seared on our collective retinas forever.
Thank the Lord the late Queen never lived to witness it. Actually hang on – can someone check in on Paddington Bear? It's the textbook definition of a marmalade dropper. No much-loved institution should have to watch another much-loved institution brought to its knees by the sight of a heavily pregnant Duchess manqué slut-dropping for the camera.
Don't get me wrong, the fact she managed to get up again is a marvel. And Harry's there in the video too, but as per, he's just the spare. Gallumphing about like a manchild has pretty much become his USP in recent years, so no surprises there. But Meghan? Really?
Cast your minds back and you may recall the ridiculous, huffy lengths the pair went to in order to keep the details of their son Archie's birth secret back in 2019. When we were finally informed she was in labour, it was a fib – Meghan had already given birth and was already home with her son. Weird doesn't begin to describe it.
Fast forward six years and now they've released a throwback film of Lilibet's imminent arrival as Meghan tries to bring on the birth by dancing in the delivery room to Starrkeisha's viral anthem The Baby Momma Dance – with a camera set up specially to record it.
The vibe is clearly meant to be hilarious and kooky – but, and I mean this literally, you had to be there. Very funny and sweet when among friends, godparents and what family they haven't managed to alienate.
But the rest of us? We have no business seeing that; being made privy to that. It's too personal; when Meghan moves, we can see the outline of the monitor strapped to her belly. No. Just no.
Hey, here's a thought; should I upload the film of me, a 42-weeks-pregnant barrage balloon, so desperate to induce labour that I bullied my appalled husband into sex – with a beef Madras as a reward for afters? Oh wait – I didn't record it. Because my life isn't one endless search for social media content.
Many couples record a lot of things (no sniggering at the back) for posterity. Fair dos. But given how punctiliously these two – oh alright then, Meghan – curates their social media posts, it's hard to believe they just randomly released it for a good old giggle.
The terrible suspicion occurs that they always intended it to go online – and nobody had the opportunity (aka the nerve) to advise them that it would be a grave misstep. Not least because it's wildly off-message for Meghan's wholesome ' trad wife ' brand that has seen her collecting honey and fussing over table arrangements.
Yes, they have stepped back from their roles as working royals. But boy are they keen to cling onto their titles – and with that comes a responsibility to (at the very least) not cavort about incongruously like a couple of demented kids' entertainers signally failing to read the room – which is furnished with hospital equipment.
Pleas for privacy will echo empty now this excruciating little gem has been viewed, scraped by AI (horrid verb, reminiscent of something parturition-related too icky ever to share) and transformed into countless memes. And that makes me sad. As well as cross.
Why? Why oh why did they release it? It's not as if they aren't media savvy; Meghan just dropped (as they say) an arty black and white picture that featured her daughter but artfully kept her face concealed. Yet, somehow it's fine to broadcast a moment so intimate it makes our toes curl with discomfiture?
Here's the thing; our senior royals know well there's a deal of difference between letting daylight in on magic – and exposing yourself to laughter and derision. There are good reasons why It's a Royal Knockout was never recommissioned. But here we have the Duchess of Sussex as she (now and then) likes to be known, making something deeply private into something uncomfortably public.
Maybe it's just proof – if indeed proof were needed – that the UK and the US are two countries divided not just by a common language but by wildly different sensibilities. The thing about dignity is that it's very difficult to define. But you sure as heck recognise its absence.
Whatever she claims in retrospect, Meghan was welcomed into 'The Firm'. She was a breath of fresh air and Harry's grandmother, the late Queen warmed to her (no small feat as she famously preferred horses to people) and pointedly seated the wide-eyed American beside her on grand occasions.
What would she have made of this little film? In truth, I think she would have had the wisdom to see it for exactly what it is; like everything else she posts, it is essentially all part of Meghan's career showreel.
On the soundtrack, Starrkeisha sings that Baby Mama is 'Tryna make some money buy some Huggies [nappies] from the store'. Granted Meghan may live in Montecito rather than dirt poor Oklahoma but the principle still stands.
She is surely auditioning for some new role. I can think of no other explanation for her bizarre decision to blow the gaff on herself and remind us why there's no way back to the House of Windsor. And more saliently that she wasn't such a good fit to begin with.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
15 minutes ago
- BBC News
Birmingham pool party plan binned over car park location
A pool party promising bikini-clad women, DJs and cocktails has been blocked from taking place due to concerns over the event's car park party was due to be held at a car park on Lower Tower Street in Birmingham on 14 June, with posters on the site's fence advertising it as suitable for those aged 18 and an application for an event licence, submitted by Endurance Osizimete, was rejected by Birmingham City Council following concerns over the state of the car applicant told the authority the site would be cleaned, adding they had tried their best to meet licensing requirements. According to the application, discussed at a licensing sub-committee meeting on 28 May, there would have been capacity for 450 guests, although only women - a "maximum of 25 ladies", toting water guns - would be allowed in the would play recorded music, female security staff would be present and changing rooms would be installed, the applicant Midlands Police opposed the application, describing the site as being "not in a fit state to stage a safe event of this nature". The force also objected to the use of "plain" rather than treated water, saying it could lead to attendees getting sick."I don't feel the site is in any way suitable at this time for hosting the proposed activity," Mark Swallow, from West Midlands Police, told the licensing committee."It would be dangerous as there are numerous hazards."A member of the council's environmental health team said he was concerned by potential "noise break-out" at the planned event. The applicant said the car park's owner was cleaning the site, while the sound would be managed by a said they had chosen not to use water treatment because of "allergy problems", adding people would not be in the pool for more than six hours."I've tried my best to figure out all the requirements and do everything that's required," he issuing its decision to deny the application, the council said there was a "very clear risk" in allowing the event to go ahead amid concerns over public nuisance and public safety. This news was gathered by the Local Democracy Reporting Service which covers councils and other public service organisations. Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.


The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
Labour battles over housing budget as experts warn crisis will get worse
Experts warn of a deepening of the UK's housing crisis due to potential government spending cuts, with funds expected to be stretched by 2026. A struggle is reportedly occurring between the Treasury and housing minister Angela Rayner over budget plans, as Rachel Reeves prepares to outline spending plans until the next election. The Local Government Association reports that over half of councils are running deficits on their housing budgets, while homeless charities warn that new social housing supply cannot keep up with demand. Housing associations are struggling with the cumulative effects of austerity budgets, the Grenfell fire tragedy, and the economic impact of Brexit, Covid-19, and the war in Ukraine, leading to a shortage of funds for new projects. Homeless charities are calling for 90,000 new social housing homes to be built per year, while Labour MPs express concern that cuts to social housing will undermine the party's housing pledge and negatively impact councils.


Sky News
16 minutes ago
- Sky News
Government struggles to slash foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
The government is struggling to cut the billions of pounds of foreign aid partly used to house asylum seekers in hotels, according to new figures. The £2.2bn Home Office estimate to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) in this financial year is only slightly less than the £2.3bn spent in 2024/25. The vast majority is used for the accommodation for asylum seekers who have arrived in the UK, with recent figures showing more than 32,000 were being housed in hotels at the end of March. Labour has pledged "to end the use of asylum hotels" and the government says it has reduced the overall asylum support costs by half a billion pounds, including £200m in ODA savings, which had been passed back to the Treasury. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said he will cut the overall ODA from its current level of 0.5% of gross national income (GNI) to 0.3% in 2027. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent on providing humanitarian and development assistance in other countries, but the UK is allowed to count refugee-hosting costs as ODA under internationally agreed rules. Labour MP Sarah Champion previously said a "scandalously large amount" of ODA has been diverted to the Home Office and has called for a cap on how much can be spent supporting asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. Asylum seekers and their families are housed in temporary accommodation if they are waiting for the outcome of a claim or an appeal and have been assessed as not being able to support themselves independently. They are housed in hotels if there is not enough space in accommodation provided by local authorities or other organisations. A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and are urgently taking action to restore order, and reduce costs. "This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026."