Last week, Meghan Sussex appeared in a holiday trailer for her Netflix special With Love, Meghan, wearing a familiar green Galvan gown. The dress, seen in her 2022 Variety shoot, quickly became the centre of a bizarre and defamatory narrative. Without evidence, multiple outlets suggested she had taken the dress without permission. Her spokesperson dismissed the story as “categorically false” and “highly defamatory,” but the headline frenzy had already taken hold. The story is not about fashion. It is about the media’s long and documented habit of criminalising Meghan Sussex in ways that align with historic racial and gendered framing.
Tabloid spin targets Meghan yet again
Page Six, NewsNation, and other outlets ran claims from unnamed sources alleging the Duchess of Sussex had kept the Galvan dress from a 2022 shoot without approval. One source alleged she simply took it. Another insisted it was common for royals to archive wardrobe pieces. A third said that no one had ever heard of that rule. The reporting offered no on-the-record confirmation from Variety, Netflix, or Galvan London. Nor did any of them publicly accuse Meghan of wrongdoing.Instead, the coverage relied on anonymous insiders and assumptions. By the time Meghan’s spokesperson issued a formal denial, the damage had already been done.
This fits a pattern. When Meghan wore a Chanel dress in New York—also previously seen in a 2022 shoot—the same accusations followed. No such scrutiny is applied to other royals. When Kate Middleton wore an emerald wrap dress this week closely resembling Meghan’s 2022 gown, the media praised her for its elegance. Meghan, however, faced theft allegations for wearing a dress she had clearly owned and used publicly.
Historical Framing Drives Current Narratives
The suggestion that Meghan Sussex had no right to the dress mirrors a long and racialised history of portraying Black and biracial women as deceptive, grasping, or undeserving. In 2016, the Daily Mail published a headline calling her “(Almost) Straight Outta Compton,” accompanied by gang statistics and misleading references to deprived neighbourhoods.
Prince Harry publicly condemned the Straight Outta Compton headline for its racist framing. The royal family later removed his statement from their official site, a choice that showed a reluctance to confront the hostility directed at Meghan. Or perhaps they approve of it?
The racist article placed Meghan in a world she never lived in and treated a middle‑class Los Angeles upbringing as criminal. That tone has shaped later coverage. Some outlets revived the theme through satire, including the BBC’s Royal Sparkle, which turned her into a caricature instead of a public figure. The pattern expanded through unfounded claims repeated as fact. The avocado story is one example. Meghan’s snack was linked to drought, conflict, and guilt, while similar coverage framed Kate and Charles as wholesome. These choices built a consistent picture of a woman treated as a target rather than a person.
These stories are deliberate and serve a purpose: to push harmful stereotypes about Black women being problematic, dangerous, even criminal. Today, it’s a dress. Tomorrow, they may accuse her of something darker. Meghan’s silence has, at times, allowed these narratives to flourish unchallenged. In staying quiet, she is not complicit, but the press has taken her restraint as an invitation to escalate. They have lied repeatedly, and because she has chosen not to respond to every slur, they believe they can keep doing it. This is racism, repackaged as gossip, and legitimised by headlines.
The Weaponisation of Anonymous Sources
Many of these recent headlines originate from what are described as fashion insiders or royal sources. In reality, many of these are unverifiable and echo language circulated on social media by anti-Meghan accounts.
A common tabloid technique involves reframing online hate as widespread sentiment, with phrases like “royal fans furious” or “critics claim.” This tactic converts digital harassment into a cycle of damaging stories legitimised by mainstream platforms. It is a form of media laundering that gives cover to racism while pretending to report news.
When the claim is theft, the implications are especially damaging. Giving talent clothing after a shoot is not unusual, it is a common practice in fashion, often considered a form of payment or part of security protocol. Meghan, who paid for her own wardrobe during her time in the royal family, is now being accused of stealing from brands that never made such claims themselves. If this were truly about journalistic ethics, those outlets would have verified the facts. Instead, they ran the story because it fits a racist template that has worked profitably for nearly a decade.
Related Stories
Final Thoughts
I believe the timing of this manufactured dress story is deliberate. Meghan Sussex’s holiday special premieres on Netflix next week and it follows a familiar pattern. When Season 1 of With Love, Meghan launched, similar anonymous “sources” claimed Netflix would cancel it, citing poor reviews from a narrow set of media critics. Many of those voices seem to believe that only white tastemakers can define what works in entertainment, particularly when the talent is Black or biracial.
Netflix did not cancel the show. They celebrated it. Later that year, co-CEO Ted Sarandos approved a second season. The backlash returned on cue. Headlines insisted the Sussexes’ Netflix deal had ended. That too was false.
Now, with Masaka Kids A Rhythm Within and Meghan’s holiday special set to stream in December, I fully expect the noise to escalate. The British press, unable to accept that a woman like Meghan can build success on her own terms, will likely treat her wins as threats. These outlets do not simply dislike her. They cannot tolerate the idea that a Black woman, once inside the royal machine, could walk away and thrive.
A black woman wears a gown on her own show, and the media call her a thief. I do not believe this is sloppy journalism. I believe it is a campaign. And I believe it is racial motivated.
Discover more from Feminegra
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If I were Meghan I would sue the shit out of theses publications. For being racist for being defamatory. This sort of reteric has been allowed to go on for too long. Now accusing her of being a thief. The only thieves are the royals I, isn’t the mood diamond on the crown stolen from India. These sort of things about Meghan come from pure racist stereotypes. Sick of it.
“Giving talent clothing after a shoot is not unusual, it is a common practice in fashion, often considered a form of payment or part of security protocol.” Actually, this is not accurate. Designers, more often than not, need the pieces back. Sometimes, clients are given the offer to buy the piece, but it is not customary to simply give it to them.
The daily mail was out of bounds to run such a headline, but Meghan has a history of taking items from shoots…the aquazzura shoes, the Chanel dress, this said green dress. She frequently accepted clothing sent to her office when she was in the royal fold, going against protocol.
It’s not rascist to call her out. Meghan is just as white as she is black and she never embraced her blackness until she became a royal. She’s never dated a black man, she was raised by a white father and ran in a predominantly white circle of friends.
The fact is, black or white, she’s just not likeable. She comes of as being transactional and manipulative. Compare her to another royal woman of color, Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. You never hear of people disparaging her and with good reason…she doesn’t display the same behavior.
Meghan was part of an anti racism campaign long before she met Harry . She spent lots of her youth with her black grandmother cared for her when she was dying.Her mother Doria a black woman is very close to Meghan , Harry and the children . Meghan has always accepted who she is just a pity the royals and the British media couldn’t.
Hello Bot! Have seen your tabloid comments all over the internet. You are exactly what this article details.
SMH. Literally, I’m not a bot. And, truly, I don’t “cut and paste”. My thoughts are my own. I’m sorry they command more attention from you than the actual article. Pity.
You are a liar. Just say you hate her and go. To quote you, “the aquazzura shoes, the Chanel dress, this said green dress. She frequently accepted clothing sent to her office when she was in the royal fold, going against protocol.
It’s not rascist to call her out. Meghan is just as white as she is black and she never embraced her blackness until she became a royal. She’s never dated a black man, she was raised by a white father and ran in a predominantly white circle of friends.”
First, she always showed us her closet on The Tig. She had so much free stuff sent to her during her time on SUITS and we saw the shoes and clothes that pre dated her time in the royal family.
Secondly, the palace receives so much free stuff as confirmed by a few reporters who were given access. Now considering her staff and security who are well versed in protocol will get to open the freebies first, do you honestly think they will allow her to accept them? This was a woman they were always falsely complaining about and calling dreadful names and we know that the men in grey suits run that joint.
The person who was proven to accept freebies was Kate Middleton and her mother, particularly pre her engagement.
Thirdly, you forget her say no to racism campaign in 2012 and her being interviewed pre Harry where she is proud of being biracial. She has the right to claim BOTH identities. And yes it is racist to accuse a black woman of stealing as its one of the racist tropes often levelled against POCs and black women,. The fact that you had to come onto this site to spread more lies is just sad. Try as you may, you will never break her. Because and still she rises.
Its a Bot. It’s literally a Bot. They are quoting tabloid talking points verbatim, and simply cutting and pasting all over the internet.
Normal people don’t comment in this manner.
It’s a Bot. A paid for (by whom is the question!!!) Bot.
Hey Bot, who signs your paycheck?
I’m not a liar and I surely don’t hate her…I simply question her character and endless playing of the victim card. It’s been five years since she stepped down from working royal and she is still talking about finding her “authentic” voice. Enough already, get on with it.
As to your first point, the tig was a vibrant and interesting blog that had gained traction and, of course, up and coming designers are going to send her stuff with the hopes of promotion. And, that bounty is fair game and hers to do with as she likes. The royal stuff, not so much. They constantly receive stuff and they constantly have to send it back so as not to look partial to one designer over another. That cache is a perk no one in the royal family enjoys.
As to her participation in the say no to racism campaign, that was over a decade ago. She was what, 30, 31? She’s not a particularly active activist. I’m not saying she denies her heritage, I’m saying that from a social and cultural perspective, being black is not all that she is. And, attacks on her, or the raised eyebrows about her behavior are not, in any way, about her race. Again, if you’re thinking of are going to make it about race, compare her to Princess Angela.
Lol! For the sake of stupidity and believing tabloid gossip. Am I supposed to believe that Kate and William prefer a pedo living next to them, as oppose to Harry and Meghan? When you start quoting tabloid trash, just know that it goes both ways. This makes Meghan comes out looking far better than the royals. You all keep showing your stupidity.
I put it to you that you are a liar. See how you’ve moved the goalposts? Let me quote you
“I simply question her character and endless playing of the victim card. It’s been five years since she stepped down from working royal and she is still talking about finding her “authentic” voice. Enough already, get on with it.
As to your first point, the tig was a vibrant and interesting blog that had gained traction and, of course, up and coming designers are going to send her stuff with the hopes of promotion. And, that bounty is fair game and hers to do with as she likes. The royal stuff, not so much. They constantly receive stuff and they constantly have to send it back so as not to look partial to one designer over another. That cache is a perk no one in the royal family enjoys.
As to her participation in the say no to racism campaign, that was over a decade ago. She was what, 30, 31? She’s not a particularly active activist. I’m not saying she denies her heritage, I’m saying that from a social and cultural perspective, being black is not all that she is. And, attacks on her, or the raised eyebrows about her behavior are not, in any way, about her race. Again, if you’re thinking of are going to make it about race, compare her to Princess Angela.”
Firstly, How is finding her authentic voice playing the victim pray tell?
Secondly, Emily Andrews was threatened with legal repercussions when she wrote that Kate accepts freebies in 2018. That was quickly hushed upo which negates your point about protocol.
Thirdly her participation in the say no to racism campaign shows her activism pre Harry but of course you had to move the goal post but saying she wasn’t active or blacktivist enough for your liking. Then you go on to say that being black is not all she is. So headlines about her being straight out of compton are what? Archie being depicted as a monkey is what?? The racist threats from two neo nazis currently in prison are what?
Lastly as to her “behaviour” and being compared to Princess Angela that is a load of bull.There’s really no meaningful comparison to be made between these women Their lives, roles, circumstances, and the contexts in which they married into royalty are entirely different. Princess Angela joined a very small, private, and discreet royal household in Liechtenstein, one that rarely deals with global media or public scrutiny. Meghan entered one of the most visible royal institutions in the world, one surrounded by intense press attention, geopolitical influence, and a long documented history of racially charged coverage. The scale, culture, and pressures of the British monarchy bear no resemblance to those of Liechtenstein, which means that using Princess Angela as a comparison point doesn’t actually tell us anything useful or accurate about Meghan’s experience. Each woman’s story stands on its own, shaped by different eras, environments, and expectations.
I related to the points raised in this article highlighting the race related bias, until I noticed the use of the name Kate Middleton, but then Meghan Sussex. If you’d said Meghan Markle I’d think there was some journalistic integrity, but by choosing that approach the author seems to also show bias. That makes me wonder how much else in this account can be trusted.
I believe that this is a smear campaign coming straight from KP and BP. These so-called royalists and tabloid journalists spend way too much time on trying to bury Meghan. This has to come from somewhere and I believe that somewhere is the royals. I truly believe that is all coordinated. Like the writer said, these attacks are amplified right before Meghan is releasing something. Hopefully, it will all be exposed one of these days.
Please ,there’s no point wasting your precious time trying to enlighten these hateful people with the truth because they will keep moving the goalposts until it’s way off the pitch. Noticed all Mandy took from the article was that Kate was called,Kate Middleton.