Unless you've been completely disconnected from the world, you've probably heard about Meghan Markle’s new Netflix cooking show, With Love, Meghan.
In this series, she attempts to rebrand herself as a domestic goddess, emphasizing home cooking and family values. However, someone from her past has stepped forward to challenge this carefully curated image. Meghan’s half-brother, Thomas Markle Jr., has made some explosive claims that contradict her narrative, dismantling her self-portrayal faster than you can say "Archewell Foundation."
During an interview with TalkTV, Thomas did not hold back. He openly criticized his estranged sister for crafting what he described as misleading stories designed to garner public sympathy. One of the biggest discrepancies lies in Meghan’s depiction of her upbringing. In her Netflix series, she paints a picture of herself as a latchkey kid who grew up on fast food and TV dinners, emphasizing how common that was in her generation. She leans heavily into the idea that she overcame a modest, almost struggling childhood. Thomas, however, calls this claim completely false. He insists they were not poor, dismissing Meghan’s nostalgic reference to the Sizzler salad bar as just another fabricated sob story. According to him, she didn’t have to scrape by; in fact, their father provided her with a comfortable, middle-class upbringing, covering the costs of private schooling and a college education.
This isn’t the first time Meghan’s narrative has come under scrutiny. Remember when she referenced the Sizzler salad bar while advocating for paid family leave? Thomas argues that she has been embellishing or outright fabricating hardship stories for years—not just since marrying Prince Harry. He also points out the stark contrast between Meghan’s professed dedication to family values and the way she treats her actual family. He highlights how their father, Thomas Markle Sr., did everything for her, yet she has completely distanced herself from him. This disconnect between her words and actions has made it difficult for many to take her claims seriously.
One of the most revealing moments in Thomas Jr.’s interview is when he challenges Meghan’s assertion that cooking has always been her "love language." He flatly states that she never cooked for anyone while growing up. That raises an interesting question—how can the entire premise of her Netflix show revolve around a supposed lifelong passion for cooking when someone who lived with her says it never existed? The inconsistency is hard to ignore.
It’s intriguing to compare Meghan’s self-presentation with the way other royal women conduct themselves. Take Catherine, Princess of Wales—can you imagine her needing to fabricate struggles or passions that don’t exist? Of course not. Catherine authentically dedicates herself to causes such as early childhood development and mental health awareness without resorting to self-mythologizing for attention or sympathy. Meghan’s approach, on the other hand, appears increasingly performative when contrasted with those who consistently demonstrate genuine commitment.
Thomas Jr. also made an unflattering remark about Meghan’s temperament, referencing what he calls the "Meghan Markle death stare"—a sharp, intimidating look he likens to a viper about to strike. This aligns with previous reports from palace insiders who alleged that Meghan had a difficult attitude, leading to high staff turnover. The recurring theme of strained relationships and reports of mistreatment make it hard to dismiss these claims as mere gossip.
He went on to make a blunt prediction about the reception of With Love, Meghan, stating that people would watch the first episode out of curiosity but quickly lose interest. In his words, by the second episode, viewers might feel compelled to "commit themselves to a psychiatric ward." While his remark is undoubtedly harsh, it raises a valid point—how authentic does the show feel? If it comes across as overly manufactured or inauthentic, audiences will see right through it.
What’s particularly striking about this situation is how drastically different Meghan’s public persona is from the way those who knew her before fame describe her. She has spent years crafting an image of herself as a humanitarian, feminist, loving wife, and mother, but her family members paint a very different picture. Compare this to working royals like King Charles, who has dedicated decades to environmental initiatives, or Queen Camilla, who has championed literacy programs and domestic violence awareness. Prince William and Princess Catherine have consistently and sincerely worked on mental health advocacy and early childhood development without exaggerating personal struggles to connect with their causes.
Meanwhile, Harry and Meghan stepped away from royal duties claiming they wanted privacy, only to then broadcast their grievances to the world at every opportunity. They insisted on escaping the constraints of royal life, yet Meghan still clings to the title of Duchess of Sussex, correcting anyone who dares address her by her maiden name. The contradictions are impossible to ignore.
One can’t help but wonder what Harry truly thinks about all of this. Does he ever question the narratives Meghan has fed him about her past? Does he ever long for the genuine relationships he once had with his brother, father, and the wider royal family? Or is he so deeply immersed in Meghan’s version of events that he can no longer see the full picture? Only time will tell.
