Here we go again.
It seems that in the six weeks since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced that they would be stepping down as senior members of the royal family, not a day has gone by without some media outlet blaming Meghan for the whole ordeal.
In all likelihood, the decision was made jointly, and while it's true that Meghan took the brunt of the bullying from the British tabloid media, insiders have indicated that Harry's trauma over Princess Diana's death -- and the role the paparazzi played in her passing -- is ultimately what spurred the Sussexes to take action.
For several weeks, the couple's future remained uncertain.
Yes, we knew that they would be stepping away from their royal duties, supporting themselves financially, and spending much of their time in Canada.
But this is uncharted territory, and specifics were initially hard to come by.
Last week, however, Harry and Meghan released a statement in which they detailed exactly how their departure would unfold.
In one of the statement's most controversial passages, the couple revealed that while they will abide with the Queen's ban on using the the name Sussex Royal in their business ventures, they don't necessarily agree with it.
“While The Duke and Duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘Royal’, it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name ‘Sussex Royal’ or any other iteration of ‘Royal,’” the statement reads.
“While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.”
Many who feel they know the royals well believe Harry would not engage in such pettiness.
No, they're convinced the decision to very professionally point out that the royals don't actually own the word "royal" is all Meghan's doing.
And now, royal biographer Angela Levin is lashing out and returning to the tired old "everything is Meghan's fault" argument.
"The language is stilted, cold and legalistic, the sentiments juvenile and angry is an expression of childish irritation that insults the most admired person in British public life," Levin wrote in the Daily Mail this weel
“My experience of Prince Harry is that he is charismatic and intuitive, a man with impeccable manners who is full of consideration to others and lights up in the presence of those who need his help,” Levin continued.
“What on earth has happened to that Harry? Why is he in the strange and invidious position of seeming to side with his wife over a loving family that includes the 93-year-old grandmother he dearly loves and who has been his rock?” she added.
“For me, there is only one way to understand his predicament, including this latest, wrong-headed outburst. I am afraid that Meghan is an impulsive woman and, as her past behavior suggests, when she’s had enough of something or someone, she simply ‘moves on.’”
From there, Levin really went all in, comparing Meghan to the treacherous Snow Queen of fairy tale fame:
“I am reminded of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale of The Snow Queen, as beautiful as she is cold, who leaves a sliver of ice in a young man’s heart.”
“Captive, a prisoner in her frozen desert, he is angry and indifferent to those who truly love him,”
Snow Queen, really?
Seems like a bit of stretch, don't ya think?
But hey, if Levin's goal was to offer up an example of the worst of bullying that led to Megxit, she did a bang-up job.