Corporette.com

Updated: Apr 16, 2021 145 Comments · by

Suit of the Week: Boss

Suit of the Week

This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

For busy working women, the suit is often the easiest outfit to throw on in the morning. In general, this feature is not about interview suits for women, which should be as classic and basic as you get — instead, this feature is about the slightly different suit that is fashionable, yet professional.

Nordstrom has a ton of markdowns right now on Boss, so if you're a fan of the brand, click on over — but be aware that many styles are in lucky sizes only. The pictured suit must be a fairly new one, because there are lots of sizes left. I love the small, navy/purple-y check, which is really fun but also sedate enough for work. The jacket is 30% off, marked down from $545 to $381, while the bootcut trousers are 60% off (!), which reduces them from $248 to only $99. (Unsurprisingly, they're selling out quickly!) Boss also has a collarless zip jacket in a similar pattern that is on sale for $267. 

This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support!

Sales of note for 9.16.24

Some of our latest posts here at Corporette…

RSS Error: WP HTTP Error: cURL error 60: Issuer certificate is invalid.

And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!

Some of our latest threadjacks include:

About Kat

Kat Griffin is the founder, publisher, and editor-in-chief of Corporette. You can read more about her here.

Comments

  2. Lobby-est

    Gorgeous suit although the color name cracks me up- “Midnight Fantasy”? Ummm no!

  3. Scrambled

    I am 34 and single and thinking about freezing my eggs. I would love to hear from any of you who have done it. What helped you make the decision to move forward, especially if it was a little financial stretch? How did you feel afterwards (maybe am more curious about the emotional side of things than the physical)? If it’s been a few years since you did it, how have things worked out for you since – did you end up using them? Thank you!!

    • anon

      I froze when I was slightly older than you (36) and had my first child at 40 (did not use the frozen eggs for him). I’m trying to have my second now (at 41) and will be trying my frozen eggs shortly. The doc gave me a 70% chance with 19 eggs frozen, but I’ve read a lot of disappointing stories, so I’m not super optimistic. If you can, freeze multiple rounds of eggs (it ends up $$$ tho, unless you have coverage for it). I would say 20-30 eggs per baby desired, to be on the absolute safe side. The good news is at 34, your eggs are still worth freezing, so I would say do it now (or very soon) if you’re going to. Good luck!!

    • Anonymous

      I did it at 34 and I’m 37 now. Such a good choice for me. I haven’t unfrozen yet and understand the odds, but like feeling like I’ve done my best. I got 15 eggs and decided that was enough. The process was smooth for me physically and emotionally was a lot but also really good.

    • Jenny

      If you are not partnered with a man now, I would suggest also freezing some embryos. I believe the success rates are much higher for frozen embryos than they are for frozen eggs.

      As someone who is on their third round of IVF, fertility is a hard journey and I wish you all the best.

      • Ellen

        If you dont have a boyfreind, are there really reputable places to get good sperm to fertilize the egg and get a viable embryo? My dad says they mix up sperm jars in the sperm bank as well as eggs in the egg bank, and we need to be so careful not to get just any sperm off some schlub on the street who is looking to make a few bucks. FOOEY!

    • Anonymous

      I froze at 35, just before I turned 36. I am so happy that I did because it freed me to date and meet men without the overarching fear of my biological clock running out. I am now 37 going on 38 and happily engaged. I’m thankful for the option to use my frozen eggs when TTC if needed. Due to ovarian hyper stimulation ( I have PCOS) I froze 45 eggs from one cycle out 66 eggs retrieved. Feel pretty good about my chances, but there are of course no guarantees.

    • Anonymous

      I did it at 38 with diminished ovarian reserve and got 8 eggs in 4 cycles (2 abandoned, 1 cycle of 7 eggs). Haven’t thawed them yet. Hoping the technology may catch up to the point I can use them (almost 41 now; by 45).

    • Anon

      One thing to think about if you are open to the possibility of single parenting in the future, the chances of conception with frozen embryos is higher than the chances with frozen eggs.

      • Anon

        Assuming cost is a factor, I would also consider whether you want to freeze eggs or pursue single motherhood by choice. I considered freezing my eggs about 18 months ago right before my 34 birthday, but after looking into the cost and the low success rates, I decided to save that money and become a single mother if I didn’t meet anyone by the time I was 36. I’m on track to start IUI soon, just a few months before my 36 birthday. Given that money is a factor for me, this was the right choice for me.

        These are not easy choices and no one decision is right for everyone. I wish you luck in whatever you decide.

        • Anonymous

          As a mom, I tell my single friends to do this if they really want kids. It’s an important thing to some people. Knowing now how I feel about my daughter, I’d have a child regardless of partner and even if it diminished my chances of finding a partner.

    • Anon

      I’ve heard that the statics of successful births from frozen eggs are abysmally low, like less than 25%, but maybe things have improved. Make sure you are able to get good data on it and understand the success rate of the clinic you choose before you proceed.

      • anon

        the problem is, there really is very little data on it because the vast majority of women who have frozen have not come back for their eggs. There was an NYT article about this a few weeks ago. Until/unless those women come back and thaw in droves (which seems unlikely), we are not going to have great data on this anytime soon. That said, it is definitely important to choose a good clinic. The best clinics for this often have their own frozen donor egg bank, so ask around if there are any such clinics in your city.

  4. Senior Attorney paging Brooks Brothers Tartan Pants

    Just popping in to thank the person who posted the Brooks Brothers wide leg tartan pants. I ordered them and they are The Best Christmas Pants Ever. And fun fact: They’re on sale now!

  5. Hip

    My 90-something grandfather has broken his hip. Which seems rare in men, but maybe b/c most men don’t live that long. He got through repair surgery, but I am afraid that this is it and I need to get a plane ticket. My parents (travelling from another state) say the plan is for him to be discharged eventually to a nursing home / rehab facility to deal with the repairs before going home (my grandmother died two years ago, at 94). He was spry and a daily walker and now this. :(

    • Anonymous

      If he’s made it through surgery successfully and was strong before, I don’t know that you need to immediately be worried. Yes, that is often the beginning of a downhill slide for many, but I know of several examples personally where they’ve had a few more years (not at their old speed unfortunately, but at least still with us).

    • Anon

      It’s also rare in men because osteoporosis is rarer in them.

      If he’s done with surgery and recovering, he’s not magically going to die, especially since you said he was healthy. (The greatest risk for the elderly is problems with anesthesia, which is past now.) My grandmother had her hip replaced two years ago at 94 and she’s 96 now and she’s fine (in the hip respect…she’s nearly blind and her knees need replaced, but that’s a different ball of wax). The recovery time takes longer for someone in their 90s, but with physical therapy and a positive outlook, he should be walking again in no time.

    • Anonymous

      Go see him now!! Even if this isn’t it, it can be the start of a rapid decline.

    • Not a doctor, but

      In my anecdotal experience, he has a good chance of being fine. 90s is quite elderly, but this is a common scenario. Both my grandmother (tiny, frail, 80) and my MIL (tall, 75) broke hips, had the replacement, went to rehab and continued on. Rehab will be good with pain management and working on getting him moving ASAP to preserve his mobility. Some help around the house might be good when he’s home, but I think there is a great chance that this is not the end of anything, and he’ll be back to his daily walks soon. You might feel better if you buy the plane ticket just to go visit him.

      • Anon

        Yes, if you can, go visit him once he’s in rehab. The more a person is able to stay occupied and busy (within what they can handle), the better!

    • anon

      I am sorry and hope for the best outcome for your family. I think it makes sense to visit.

      Just to add anecdata, my grandmother broke her hip when she was a little younger although has underlying physical degenerative illness and lives somewhere that is not accessible at all (lots of stairs). She did well with the surgery and the rehab facility was wonderful for her and she’s back home (this was years ago). She obviously continues to face the serious health issues she had before but the treatment path for the hip was straightforward and not as crushing a diagnosis as you might think for her, very fortunately for our family.

    • Vicky Austin

      It sounds like he will be okay, but go visit him if you can – you’ll never regret that.

    • Worry About Yourself

      When did you last see him? If it was recent, I would actually advise not going now, unless you really, honestly, desperately want to, and/or the rest of the family is going. When my grandfather was in the hospital for the last time (we obviously didn’t know for sure, but it seemed likely), my mom said that not only was there no expectation that we travel to say our goodbyes, but that we wouldn’t want our last memories of him to be of him lying in a hospital bed, pale and unconscious, with tubes and machines everywhere. I’d recommend waiting until he’s out of the hospital, and then visiting him, taking this as a good reminder not to take his health for granted.

      That said, depending on how many family members live near him, traveling to visit him in the hospital to cheer him up and keep him company while he recovers is a great idea.

    • Anonymous

      Not sure if you’re still reading, but my dad broke his femur at 84 and his hip at 90. In both cases he went to a rehab center for a few months and then home with some hired care takers. He continued to improve physically more than a year after each broken bone. It was amazing to see and a good lesson in how important PT and stubbornness can be. ? Hang in there—sending lots of good thoughts.

  6. anon

    I know overalls are a very divisive topic, but putting aside whether you personally like them or not, would you consider them to be still in style?

    • Cat

      For those of us who were old enough to wear them as a ~look~ in the 90s (cough cough), no. For intentionally ironic first-time wearing by like 20yos? Apparently.

      • Anonymous

        This is how I feel too. My pre-teen daughter and all her friends were wearing shorts overalls this summer. So that makes it a no for me.

      • anonymous

        Same. I wore them when I was in college in the mid-90s. And Doc Martens. I still have the Docs and considering dusting them off and trying them again.

    • DCR

      No, but I don’t think they have ever been in style for adults during my 35+ year life.

    • Anon

      Nope, still scarred for life from being forced to wear them as a kid in the 80s. Same with knee socks. I’m a runner and cannot bring myself to even try the compression socks that everyone raves about. Never, ever, ever.

    • Anonymous

      Yes, if are a visual artist who paints (so no for photographers). MUST wear a shirt underneath if female; the bra-only (or no-bra) look has lost its shock value. Chucks or Doc Martins seem to be the right footwear.

      Yes, if you are a wee child.

      Otherwise, no. Have clearly overthought this.

    • NOLA

      I bought a skirtall that was short and cute last summer. It was great for throwing on over a t-shirt and running errands. I occasionally dressed it up more with a long sleeved t-shirt and sandals. That said, I never wore traditional overalls, even when they were in when I was a kid in the 70s.

    • anon in brooklyn

      I still wear them. I have a cream colored straight leg pair that I wear, often with an oversize tweed blazer on top. I think it goes more “working artist” than “kid”

    • anon

      they are in style at agricultural events, state fairs and farm shows and of course farms…..in those scenarios they never go out of style

    • pugsnbourbon

      These replies are cracking me up. I just bought a pair and I’m so stoked to wear them. And yes I will be wearing Docs with them.

    • Anon

      The overalls of the 90’s are not in style, but I do think overalls are in style. Probably not a winter look and it’s definitely younger & hipper style.

    • Anon

      The style and cut matter here A LOT, but if you get those things right and current, and they are on brand with your personal style, then yes. IMHO

    • Anonymous

      They are au currant here in Portland OR, albeit preferably in linen or similar vs denim.

      That said, my preK boy wants some to match little brother so I can’t quite bring myself to have us all 3 match. And I’m scarred from the 90s.

  7. Meghan and Harry's announcement

    Any reactions? I’m a little surprised that it happened this quickly. I had assumed the rumors of all the conflict behind the scenes were overblown, but now I’m not so sure!

    • Anon

      I’m happy for them. My wholly uninformed take is that they are rejecting the rigid, traditional role assigned to them rather than the other way around. As a Torontonian, I’ve sort of felt like Meghan was one of us and this decision just seems right. Or rather, I can envision having the same life experience and making the same choice. I have an inkling they plan on settling in Toronto or Vancouver.

      • Anon

        Editing to add: Suits (where Meghan got her biggest role) is faaaamous in the Toronto legal scene because it was constantly filming downtown in actual legal office space.

      • Anonymous

        As a Canadian I dearly hope the government will not be funding their security or independent lifestyle.

        • Anon

          I think they are probably okay financially, what with his family owning vast crown lands of incredible value. Not being taxpayer funded doesn’t mean they aren’t funded by their family.

          Also, without knowing how much Meghan made as an actress, I can imagine a world in which she is sitting on substantial (for a normal person) savings.

        • Anonymous

          They are independently wealthy from his mom and the Queen Mother so their personal security won’t fall to Canada but once ppl figure out where they are living, traffic/policing costs etc from the people going there to try and spot them will be on Canada. Hoping they buy in the USA instead of Vancouver.

    • Housecounsel

      Seriously! I saw that People was reporting it earlier, but now it is in the Washington Post! I can’t explain why I care but it makes me really happy.

    • Cat

      I find it interesting and a bit concerning. They’ve only relinquished a small part of their funding, in exchange for freedom to earn money and leverage their royal titles how they see fit. Seems like you shouldn’t be able to be SussexRoyal when you’re not acting as representatives of the monarchy.

      • Anon

        +1 on not being able to be SussexRoyal. But I think they have trademarked it.

        • Anonymous

          But they are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Plenty of royals have titles but are not full time working royals being paid by the public.

      • Anonymous

        Srsly that’s your take? They are giving up public financing and continuing to support the Queen, the Commonwealth, and their charities. A streamlined monarchy has always been the plan. Charles vocally wants fewer people on the payroll.

        • Anonymous

          Fewer people means that Anne, Andrew and Edward’s kids don’t have paid roles. I think everyone was expecting for Harry to shoulder some work until the Cambridge kids were old enough. He’s the most popular member of the RF after the Queen so it’s a real hit for the RF.

    • anon

      The Swedish prince and his wife made a similar announcement a few weeks ago – seems like other young European royals may follow. This gives them more flexibility to run their own lives and live where they want. They kids of the Swedish prince will not be paid as royal family – they have to find their own income stream (that is not funded by tax payers), which seems like the modern approach.

      • Anonymous

        Swedish situation is different because they don’t have the entire Commonwealth to attend to. That’s at least one or two international trips of ten days- two weeks every year each that will now have to be covered by someone else. This year alone Wiliam and Kate were in Pakistan, Harry and Meaghan were in South Africa, and Charles was in New Zealand. Once Charles is King, he’ll have a lot of domestic stuff so that leaves more travel on Will and Kate which is a PITA for them with young kids.

    • Anon

      I’m really happy for them. I don’t interpret it as an admission of conflict within the family at all. I just think Harry and Meghan don’t really want to work as royals and maybe don’t want to live in the UK, which I think makes a lot of sense. How many of us would want our parents to choose our job, our home location and our schedules as adults? And it’s not fun to be so publicly scrutinized, even if it comes with great privilege. Fwiw, the unhappiest person I know is mega rich but was born into a very successful family business and told from a young age that he would have to run the business some day. Having no control over his destiny really did a number on his mental health. And that’s a much less extreme example than the royals because he still has a lot of say in his life (other than his job).

      • Anonymous

        They could have easily spend months of the year outside the UK, still maintained their roles and drawn attention to important charitable causes and issues. Disappointed for the Commonwealth that young POC will not see themselves reflected in the Royal Family.

        They just got back from a 6 week vacation. It’s not exactly a 50 week a year job.

        • Anon

          They are not leaving the Royal family, and it sounds like they’re going to continue to do charity work, just more independently.

          • Anonymous

            They can’t do more expanded charity work and do events on behalf of the RF. RF charity work has to be no -political by law so if they wanted to do non-advocacy charity work they would have just stayed as active royals

    • Anonymous

      Super disappointed. They could have stepped back without walking away totally. There was a real opportunity to highlight issues important towards them (e.g the first cookbook with WOC she did post- tower fire) and I think they underestimate their ability to be private citizens in North America.

      It’s a less strategic move than I would have expected from them. They could have let the Prince Andrew situation play out a bit more before making this kind of move. With Andrew stepping back, the RF needed H and M so they had an ability to negotiate for a better situation. Realistically, the next ten years are when the RF need H and M most in terms of completing engagements, they could have asked to be based outside the UK for portions of the year and focus on Commonwealth work. In another 10-20 years, the Cambridge kids will be older and more able to start doing more engagements which means less need for H and M and they could have retired.

      I feel bad for Kate because it’s going to be a lot more work/pressure for her in the next few years which isn’t easy with three young kids. Beatrice and Eugenie are probably delighted because they are going to get a ton more work now that the RF needs people for engagements. They were off the senior royal list previously. So a win for Prince Andrew which is a disappointment.

      • Anon

        I mean, they tried taking smaller steps back (like the 6 week break in North America over the holidays after a long period of work) and they got absolutely eviscerated for it. They just can’t win with the press and a certain segment of the public and to be honest I feel like it has a lot to do with Meghan’s race.

        There was always going to be a ton of pressure on Kate. She’s the future Queen and all the support in the world from Meghan and William’s female cousins won’t change the pressure on her.

        • Anon

          Kate seems to want the pressure. She signed up for this, clearly, and lives her life accordingly.

          Nothing about how Meghan and Harry live their life suggested that they had agreed to being super-duper-involved Royals. In fact, every step they have taken as a couple has been to exit the limelight slowly but surely. This seems like their plan from day 1, that they’ve been slowly executing as the timing was right (instead of flounce quitting.)

          • Anon

            Yeah, I think Kate is just much better suited to being a working royal than Meghan. She met William in college, she’s been preparing for this life since she was a teenager and has never really had a career outside of being a wife and mother. Meghan was a fully-formed adult in her mid-30s with her own very successful career when she met Harry, and it’s just such a different life than Kate’s pre-royals life. It isn’t a criticism – Kate seems like a genuinely nice person and a wonderful mother – but I think this life is just much more in line with what she always envisioned for herself, whereas Meghan probably never imagined leaving her career to be a stay at home wife and mother (which is what being a royal is for a prince’s wife, in essence).

        • Anonymous

          There will be more pressure for her to do more events because there is one less ‘glamourous’ young royal to do the events. There’s just one fewer person to do the same amount of work as was there before.

          Totally agree that most coverage of Meaghan has been racist but disagree that they got ‘eviscerated’ about the recent vacation. It was a vacation of standard length, and public is used to royals paying for their own vacations multiple times a year but press was just annoyed they didn’t get a photo op during the trip (like Diana used to do with Harry and William on Alps ski trips etc). Pretty standard for RF family members to do photo-ops in exchange for press leaving them alone at other times. Like when Harry and William were in boarding school.

      • Anonymous

        I think it’s great and Kate will be fine and you sound weird and paranoid.

      • Anonymous

        I probably spend WAY too much time thinking about this, but from what I’ve read (with many boulders of salt) and knowing someone who has been friends with Kate since before her engagement and does not keep her confidences well, I completely believe that Kate has been pushing behind the scenes to push them out/not stopping William’s people from feeding rumors against them. Those “palace sources” that the Daily Mail and others use are often from William’s & Charles’ own advisors, and the palace’s reaction to the stories that Kate had botox versus their ignoring false, negative stories about Meghan (the bathtub paid for with taxpayer $ as just one example) shows that Kate and William are very good at playing the game. It’s also no coincidence that Kate & William released that black and white picture for Christmas right after Meghan & Harry’s Christmas card came out, for example. So I think K&W got exactly what they wanted — less competition to be the favorites in the press and elsewhere.

        • Anonymous

          I think the York’s are behind the Meghan trashing. Meghan has had some unforced errors but the York’s benefit by having h Th e spotlight off of Andres. Kate doesn’t need to care so much. And that vacay was long, longer than any I’ve had in BigLaw and longer than any uninterrupted period of my maternity leaves. If I had their “jobs” I would never dial it back.

      • Anon

        Prince Charles is going to be king within 10 years, probably a lot sooner, and he’s made it abundantly clear that a) he hates Prince Andrew and b) under his reign, the working part of the family will be much smaller. This is totally in line with his plans, and won’t translate to more work for Beatrice and Eugenie at all. Criticize H&M if you want, but it’s absurd to say this is a “a win for Prince Andrew.” It has nothing to do with him or his kids, and won’t benefit them at all.

        • Anonymous

          I’d be shocked if B and E don’t get brought in to do more engagements. Minus Andrew and Harry there will be hundreds of annual engagements that need to be filled and 200+ more when the queen retires. William and Kate can’t be in three places at once.

          • Anon

            The Queen will never retire, she will die on the throne. Her stance on this has been made quite clear.

          • Anonymous

            She won’t officially retire but she can’t keep up 200+ plus engagements for much longer. In the next five years there’s going to be a huge need to cover engagements. I suspect Edward and Sophie will have to step up a bit now that their kids are older.

      • Anon

        Prince George is six! It’s realistically gonna to be 20 years before he can start doing royal engagements. Yes, Kate may have more flexibility is the kids get older (but they already have like two full time nannies so I’m not sure that’s really true), but it’s unreasonable to ask somebody to do a job they don’t want to do and didn’t pick for 20 years, especially when that job isn’t really needed and comes with so much scrutiny.

      • Anon

        Yeah Kate and William have 3 young kids, but they have tons of help. Everyone has known the duties of the royal family since forever (and certainly the perils since before Kate was born). She chose this as her job, and I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for someone who will have to show up at a few more public events every year in exchange for the massive wealth and privilege they enjoy.

        But I also feel like Harry and Meghan are trying to have their cake and eat it, too, so I’m not sure how I feel about the situation from that perspective.

      • anon

        Kate is a grown woman who signed herself up for this. And in general, I think the fact that this is treated as a major news story is a bit eyeroll-worthy; literally every country in the commonwealth would be just fine if every single member of the family quit being a working royal tomorrow. The commonwealth does not need royal tours, and, I’d venture to say, the UK doesn’t need a monarchy, although that’s obviously up to them.

        One of my friends is a princess of another monarchy (she’s married to the heir apparent’s brother, and he has children, so kind of like Harry/Meghan), and none of their royal family is taxpayer supported at all other than the monarch and the direct heirs. Her husband (who is a prince!) has a 9-5 job. They and their country seem just fine with only a handful of “working royals.”

        • 780

          Yeah I kind of agree with this. What benefit do the royals provide to England or the commonwealth? What job are they actually doing?

          • Anon

            None. They’re figureheads. I understand it’s an institution in the UK but it’s not like international diplomacy is going to collapse if H&M stop traveling all over the world staying in luxury resorts. These trips are basically vacations with a little schmoozing thrown in.

    • Anon

      Taking the very long view of things, Harry is sixth in line for the throne and Archie is seventh, but #3, 4, and 5 are kids who will likely grow up, marry, and have kids (and then grandkids) of their own. Option 1 is that Archie grows up as royalty but becomes increasingly irrelevant as time goes on, and Option 2 is for Harry and Meghan to make that transition for him when he’s a baby.

    • Anon

      I find this…pretty gross, actually. They have a Q&A up on their website (not the Buckingham Palace site) where they talk about funding, and they’re giving up just the 5% of funding that comes from the Queen, but keeping 95% that comes from Charles, and their titles, and taxpayer funded security from both the U.K. and whatever North American country they plan on making their home. Plus making outside income. So they’re going to continue to represent the Queen and act as representative of the U.K. but basically go the the US or Canada to make a ton of money off of their titles. Not a great look in my opinion. I like Meghan, and think the U.K. press has been awful to her, but this feels like taking all the benefits of royalty without the duty/nonpartisan sacrifice part. (The equivalent is Princess Madeline of Sweden and her husband, who live in FL, but he kept his regular job, didn’t take a title, and they only get public funds when doing Swedish public engagements.)

    • Anonymous

      I thought it was really interesting that they didn’t spend Christmas with the royal family at Sandringham. Harry has always seemed like such a family man (I get that Meghan and Archie are his family now, but he still has all of his family)…the idea of moving to a different continent seems like a big departure from who Harry is. Harry has always been the passionate humanitarian who has seemed to love his causes and the platform his royalty gave him to advance meaningful causes, and now he’s walking away? Just doesn’t fit for me. FWIW, I am 500% positive they’re going to get divorced someday. Meghan’s values don’t seem to align with Harry’s. Harry’s always seemed like a down-to-earth guy and Meghan seems SO high maintenance and demanding.

      • anon

        Agree 100% that this relationship has a shelf life and they’ll eventually split. I don’t know that I’d call her high maintenance and demanding … but it really does not seem like she gave enough thought to what royal life would *really* be like.

      • Anonymous

        Oh my goodness can you read? They’ll still be part time in the UK and he is continuing his charitable work.

        • LaurenB

          I went to the same college as Meghan (as did Kat). I know people who know her in real life. She’s not “uppity” at all. She’s allowed to have her own mind and to negotiate with her husband as to how she wishes to live her life. This is such a non-story — good for her and her new little family, I wish them well in their move. Anything else is just pathetic and catty.

    • DCR

      I’m not surprised. Isn’t it pretty normal for any royals not in the direct line of succession to step back in adulthood? I mean, he’s never going to become king. Are any of the queen’s later children considered senior royals?

      • Anonymous

        Yes all of them except now Andrew. Anne is very busy. Edward tried working for a while but there were problems.

      • Anonymous

        Yes, Andrew was until he stepped backs in the fall. Anne and Edward still do numerous events. Especially with the queen being elderly, they are relied on to do a lot of events. It’s not like being President in the US, they also have the whole Commonwealth to do regular tours/events with ( Australia, Canada, South Africa, Bermuda, Jamaica etc etc – 53 countries in all). Having two less people to do the work is a huge hit – especially when they were so popular – eg much better to send them vs Prince Edward somewhere

        • Anon

          I mean, I think the people in Bermuda will be ok if they don’t get a visit from British Royals every year. The royals’ “jobs” are extremely unimportant.

          • Anonymous

            Even the major countries like Canada and Aus don’t get yearly visits. Post- Brexit even UK needs all the political and trade connections it can get and this is a huge hit to that. 94% of the Commonwealth is in Asian or African countries where Harry and Meaghan were particularly popular.

        • Anon

          But Sophie and Lady Louise are doing engagements together now, and I can definitely see Louise taking over for Princess Anne as she ages and Louise grows up. They seem cut from the same cloth.

    • January

      I am mostly happy for them, and as I just said to a friend, this is the type of basically inconsequential world news I need right now.

    • Vicky Austin

      I feel like this is them trying to have it all, and I don’t know if it’s going to work. I feel like they would be happier either just committing to the life now and then being able to move back in 10-20 years as Anonymous 3:21 says, or just leaning out entirely a la Princess Anne’s kids.

      I honestly think Meghan must still be reeling from all the sudden and immense changes in her life in the last couple years though. Maybe being on break made her realize everything she’s been carrying.

      • Anonymous

        I think they want it half in half out but they will end up totally out like Princess Anne’s kids. British RF is required to be non-political so they can’t do some events part time and they do charity advocacy on the side. All British RF charitable activities are politically neutral (eg mental health, endangered species etc).

      • Cat

        The Sussexes apparently did not discuss this announcement with the royal family at all. Wow.

        • Anon

          …you know this how? British tabloids will print anything, I don’t consider them a remotely trustworthy source.

          • Anonymous

            It’s been reported by the BBC and the Buckingham Palace statement said that discussions are in very early stages so…sounds like more than a tabloid rumor to me.

          • Anonymous

            BBC reported it and the tersely worded statement from BP is basically confirmation

    • Anonymous

      We can see who wears the pants in that family . . . She wants to live the life she wants to live with a prince by her side, if she needs to separate him from him family and the only life he’s known in order to be a part of her trashy family, so be it. Hope they get divorced after having 2-3 kids and he returns to his senses.

        • Anonymous

          how is this racist when the trashy side of her family is the white side? Her mom is a class act.

        • Anon

          Also wildly misogynistic. Harry and William are super different people and he’s always known he’s never going to be king, and doesn’t have the same interest (or obligation) in Royal duties that William does. I’ve never understood why this is all being blamed on Meghan. Harry seems like he’s very much in the drivers seat here, and to the extent there’s a rift, I think it’s between the brothers, not their wives, who are reportedly friendly but not close.

          • Anon

            Exactly.

            Their wives have an obligation to play nice and not cause problems, but it’s not their job to be besties or to mend family rifts.

      • Anon

        Or…he is sick of living in the limelight as well which is specifically why he was attracted to an older American actress. Lol you act like you know these people. “Separate him from his family”? Girl, she isn’t keeping him away, and they RARELY do events with all the royals. His own family sent him on an Africa tour. They’ll call and see each other at holidays and as they otherwise wish like everyone else. I feel so bad for you that you waste so much emotion and brain space on strange adults making their own decisions.

        • Anonymous

          Getting to do the tours of the ‘big countries’ like Canada, Australia and South Africa is reserved for senior royals. The Africa tour was a promotion not an exile.

    • Anon

      Did anyone see the palace’s statement? Seems like H and M maybe jumped the gun with their announcement and took the queen by surprise!

    • Jeffiner

      Harry had to go through a lot of therapy after Diana’s death to become the man he is today, and he says his biggest fear is watching the paparazzi do the same thing to his wife and child. Meghan seemed to be very uncomfortable with all the paparazzi as well, so its not surprising that they would both want an out.

      • Anon

        I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of this is driven by Harry, and his reaction to the press about Meghan. Harry has always seemed to hate the press, understandably, and it seems like he has been in the limelight a lot more over the past two years then at any other time prior in his life.

      • Anon

        This. He sees history repeating itself and he’s terrified. I don’t think Meghan is forcing him into this at all.

    • ohMinnow

      My take is that Harry got this cleared by HRM before proposing marriage to MM.
      There’s no way in hell he would disappoint his Grandmum with a move like this. Also, MM is not that skilled (wink-wink!) that he’d forsake everything!?! Come on. He’s been in several intimate relationships prior to MM. It seems this has been his plan since early adulthood.

    • Cat

      I like the Corsa better. The “concave” shape of the Concavo’s heel isn’t attractive to me personally. Note however that the Corsa has a wrapped leather heel rather than the stacked heel of the Concavo – YMMV on whether you’re prone to scraping up heels.

    • Anon

      I’ve never heard of this brand but this daily fishing for clicks is really turning me off of it completely.

      • Anon

        Right, this is a complete spam attempt. This brand is never discussed here other than by this one poster who posts links to items and asks contextless questions about them. If he/she doesn’t get a response to one post they try again. anon at 3:02, what you’re trying to do isn’t welcome here; please take the clickfishing attempts elsewhere.

        • Anonymous

          Ugh, looks like you’re right. Thanks for pointing it out.

          I’m having a terrible afternoon and literally just gave them clicks because I wanted something frivolous to take my mind off the bad news I just received. Oops.

    • Anonymous

      Um mGemi is pretty well known. To me not any different than an MMLbir Jcrew link being posted.

  9. Unemployment Question

    Question on applying for unemployment benefits. I am losing my job at the end of January. I have known for several months that this would happen as the grant that funds my position was not renewed and there are no similar roles at my nonprofit that I can transition into. While I have been networking and applied handful of jobs, I am also expecting a baby in mid-February so it seemed wise to hold off on starting a new job until after the baby was born. Am I eligible to apply for unemployment? Technically, I probably can’t work when the baby is brand new and am not willing to work until the baby is 2 months old. Also, what are the repercussions on my employer if I file for unemployment? No severance or short term disability. They have offered to have me as a consultant on a few specific projects once the baby is a few months but I wouldn’t want to screw up my unemployment benefits for limited number of hours of work. Thanks!

    • Worry About Yourself

      I think it depends on your state, in MA you need to be able to work and actively job hunting to receive unemployment. Also, you may be able to work part-time in addition to unemployment, if you make under a certain amount it might not eat into your benefit, but again, laws vary by state.

    • Alena

      Your employee should confirm that they made your role redundant and you get unemployment. Also, if there is no severance and any income you might be eligible for state sponsored health insurance (depending on a state)

    • Anon

      IME, you have to certify that you are working for work and are available for work in order to get unemployment. I doubt you will be eligible unless you lie, which i would not advise

    • Anonymous

      End of January to whenever the baby arrives would likely be eligible – that could be three weeks if baby is a week late.

      This whole thing is so bizarre to me as a Canadian because the unemployment system is literally what funds the basic paid parental leave amount. Like having the baby is the reason you cannot be employed same way as medical unemployment works.

  10. Gail the Goldfish

    Paging Verena-I just left you a late response on the morning thread to your vacation suggestion request.

Back to Top

About

Work with Corporette®

Serious Stuff

work fashion blog press mentions