Whitney Cummings is often regarded as a lighter version of Amy Schumer, with her claim to fame largely attributed to her connections with Joe Rogan and his circle of comedians. While she’s technically a comedian, many argue she lacks the humor to back up that title. Recently, she weighed in on Meghan Markle’s latest show, and while some expected a brutal roast, TikTok users have already done the heavy lifting, making Whitney’s input feel almost unnecessary.
Instead of outright criticizing the show, Whitney took a different approach, suggesting that Meghan wasn’t even trying to make a good show for audiences. According to her, the production seemed less about quality entertainment and more about subtly taking jabs at the royal family.
Her observations quickly took a bizarre turn. She commented on Meghan’s discussion about tea, ridiculing how the Duchess compared sun-steeped tea to traditional British tea culture. Whitney appeared baffled by Meghan’s dismissal of the formality surrounding tea in the UK, seemingly unaware of its deep-rooted cultural significance. The attempt at humor fell flat, leaving many wondering if she even understood the point she was trying to make.
Then came the discussion about King Charles’ jam-making. Whitney stumbled through her thoughts, confusing jam and preserves while attempting to highlight how Meghan conveniently preferred the latter. However, she did manage to touch on an interesting loophole—how in California, classifying your home as a working farm (even if it’s just picking a few raspberries) can lead to significant tax breaks. Whether intentional or not, Whitney essentially exposed the idea that Meghan and Harry’s farming ventures might be more about financial benefits than a genuine passion for homemade preserves.
One of the most eyebrow-raising moments was Whitney’s odd fixation on Meghan being barefoot. She seemed to believe that Meghan intentionally emphasized her bare feet as some sort of statement against royal traditions. This led to an awkward ramble where she inaccurately suggested that royal women were forced to bind their feet—an absurd claim with no historical basis.
Whitney’s attempt at analysis continued as she speculated that Meghan’s show wasn’t meant for the general public but was instead directed toward the royal family itself. She likened it to people posting cryptic messages online in hopes of getting a reaction from an ex. While it’s clear Meghan’s work often carries underlying messages, Whitney’s interpretation felt exaggerated, as though she was trying too hard to spin an elaborate theory.
At one point, she claimed she wasn’t taking sides, but after several minutes of bashing Meghan and bringing up the royal family, it was evident where her opinions leaned. She threw in a stray comment about Kate Middleton, or as she rudely referred to her, “Catherine, the stewardess of a plane that never lands.” This attempt at wit failed to land, much like the rest of her observations.
Whitney then ventured into even murkier waters by bringing up Princess Diana’s tragic passing. She appeared to suggest that Meghan’s paranoia about being poisoned was justified, implying some kind of ongoing royal conspiracy. The statement was not only irresponsible but also played into unfounded theories, making it clear that she was grasping for anything that might seem controversial.
By the end of her segment, Whitney admitted that she wasn’t mad about Meghan’s show, claiming she didn’t think Meghan cared about the criticism. However, moments earlier, she had spent considerable time dissecting every detail as if it truly mattered. The contradiction was hard to ignore.
Whitney Cummings’ take on Meghan Markle’s latest venture felt like a confused rant rather than a sharp comedic critique. Her analysis lacked coherence, her jokes missed the mark, and her attempts at wit often ended in misinformed assumptions. If anything, her commentary served as a reminder that not every take needs to be shared—especially when it’s this muddled.
