It would be wonderful if Meghan is announced as patron (Or is it patroness?) of the National Theater. I imagined some will claim she never did professional theater work but royals have taken patronages where they do not have direct experience. Being once an an actress Meghan understands the profession. I'll wait for the official announcement too.
While Meghan may never have acted professionally in the theater, she acted quite a bit on stage as a child and as a teenager in lead roles in school productions. And she majored in theater and international relations at Northwestern University in Chicago.
Fair enough, but I wouldn't characterize the Britsih Royal Family as "patriarchal" when the head of the family actually happens to be a woman (The Queen) !
More so than being "patriarchal", what the BRF has to be above all nowadays is politically neitral, and that's where Meghan's "being silenced" is coming from IMHO. Meghan was too much of a political activist before getting married and that is obviously incompatible with her new status as a princess of the United Kingdom.
It doesn't matter that the head of the British monarchy is female (as others have mentioned), Great Britain and indeed most of the world is patriarchal in its traditions, practices, laws, etc. There's a reason why QE-I never married.
Also, in her former life, while the Duchess of Sussex was definitely outspoken about adopting rescue dogs, and advocating on behalf of women and young girls, she was not a huge 'political activist' in the sense of getting out on the front lines in public, picketing and marching. She did work in soup kitchens, participate in a USA Network campaign against racism, and she advocated in ways she could for those in need. However, the majority of her early adult life was spent building her career as an actor and nurturing a 7-year relationship with her first serious boyfriend (who eventually became her first husband).
Although Meghan had an early interest in possibly making a career in politics (that's why she majored in international relations), she always seemed more focused on making a difference for others in personal ways. Her advocacy has been passionate and idealistic, yet soft-spoken, never strident. Case in point is the USA Network campaign circa 2012.
I kinda miss this strong, gentle, outspoken young woman's frank and unrestricted voice in the world. I hope she will be able to continue lending her strength to important causes in ways that she can within the more constraining confines of the British royal family.
So far, Meghan seems to be picking her spots in a sound, respectable and thoughtful way (witness her brief comments at the Royal Foundation Forum last February, her work with the women of Hubb Community Kitchen, and the confident speeches she gave during the recent South Pacific tour).
You are correct, the Queen and her family must remain neutral in all things political, it is a major part of our constitution. It is not up to Meghan to come in and whip things up or change things, if she didn't know what she was getting in to she should have done her homework better. I am actually a bit fed up of Meghan losing her voice, being silenced, if you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen.
There's a difference between outside observers' commentary of all stripes (including tabloid media, academics, royal journalists,
and admiring fans). Since it is a given that members of the royal family do not speak out on personal matters, much less controversial matters regarding adjusting to their role within the family, we do not happen to truly know what Meghan feels and thinks at the moment. I agree with those who say she had a good handle on what she was walking into. She's fully accepted by the powers-that-be within the royal family, and she has her husband's love and full support. That's key to her charting a successful course, while navigating complicated shoals and murky waters.
Meghan probably feels she can make more of an impact for important causes as the Duchess of Sussex. It's very early days yet.