Duchess Kate repeated a McQueen look, kissed an 88-year-old D-Day veteran

FFN_CHP_PrinceWilliam_Kate_060614_51442209

Here are some photos of Duchess Kate and Prince William attending the D-Day events in Normandy on Friday. These pics came in too late for me to include them in the Queen Elizabeth post, but you can enjoy them now. I wasn’t too excited because she repeated this dress. I mean, it’s a great dress and everything, but I was hoping for something new. This is the same blue Alexander McQueen dress that she wore in New Zealand in April. Back then, she wore it with a ponytail navy pumps.

In France, she wore the McQueen with a black fascinator/hat and black pumps. The side pieces of her hair were secured back with what appears to be a simple hair band. I like the hat, but I think it must have been really, really hot on the dais. William was noticeably sweating and Kate looked a bit flushed in some photos. Before the big event where world leaders spoke, William and Kate attended a tea party for some of the elderly veterans of D-Day. One of the men, 88-year-old Arthur Jones, started flirting with Kate and he asked her for a kiss, because he had always wanted to be kissed by a princess. She obliged! She kissed his cheek. Then William came up and accused Jones of “chatting up” his wife. I’m not even making this up!!! That really happened.

Oh, and Grenadier Guard Eric Presland, 94, asked Kate about Prince George (the bruiser!!!) and this is what happened: “I asked Kate how was the little ‘un and she said if he were there, he would be making short work of the plate of cakes.” Ha. George is hungry all the time.

Last thing: Buzzfeed has a user-generated article with is this sort of amazing takedown of the Cambridges’ “we’re so normal” shtick and how they’re alienating their subjects. The writer blames Kate for “exacerbating” William’s paranoia about royal work and royal life, and the writer claims the courtiers are throwing up their hands at Kate and her decision to step back even further from royal life. It’s a really fascinating read on the dynamics of their marriage and how the courtiers really feel about them.

FFN_CHP_PrinceWilliam_Kate_060614_51442217

FFN_CHP_PrinceWilliam_Kate_060614_51442787

wenn21433075

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

177 Responses to “Duchess Kate repeated a McQueen look, kissed an 88-year-old D-Day veteran”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Ellie66 says:

    She looks very nice and I love that she kissed the old Vet and William joked about it. :) nice to hear a sweet and happy story about the royals.

  2. wolfpup says:

    Out with William – in with Harry, I say. William’s not interested, that doesn’t make him a bad person – just not the right one for the job.

    On another note, I hate that Steve McQueen dress. I have no idea why anyone would want to put in on…I can’t see someone wearing it in America; so unstylish, I would be embarrassed to wear it anywhere! The Steve McQueen label in the garment, adds nothing to its charm, wait, it has no charm. Looks like a bad uniform; like the color (snicker) though…

    The pink outfit the Queen wore to France was a beautiful, sophisticated dream. It is easy to imagine what she looked like when she was younger.

    I can’t wait to see everyone weigh in on this article about William and Kate. She’s always wanted to be a stay at home wife. Didn’t Will say somewhere, that was what she was going to do? Poor Q. Elizabeth – maybe they could “pretend” for a few years…wait, they are only interested in themselves.

  3. Esti says:

    That story is adorable. :) . What a great day of celebrations for the veterans.

    Much as I like seeing Kate in new clothes, I think it was definitely deliberate on her part to repeat something so that the coverage didn’t focus on her fashion. Smart choice for the occasion.

  4. skipper says:

    I think she is lovely and it was so sweet of her to let him kiss her cheek. I think Kate and William are both down to earth and kind. After all, they are human and have feelings just like any of us. I really like them both.

    • emma says:

      ITA – They are the most hard-working of ALL the royals! Glad to see someone else recognizes their value.

      • JulieM says:

        Emma- is this sarcasm? I confess I’m beginning to not be able to tell snark from true feelings.

      • HH says:

        Kate and William certainly aren’t the most hardworking of all the royals. In fact, they’re closer to the end of the list. You’ve HM The Queen, Prince Phillip, Prince Charles and Camilla, Princess Anne, Prince Harry, Prince Edward and Sophie. I mean hell, even Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie even put in a decent amount of work for them being pushed out of the slimmed down monarchy. To say William and Kate are the most hardworking is either being completely misinformed or trolling.

    • kri says:

      I’m American, so some of this is lost on me. They seem to be making appearances alot…and maybe she is trying to be conservative in her spending on clothes…is that bad? It seems like maybe they want to have a bit of a normal life. Will keeps wanting to fly, and she doesn’t want to be on tour constantly-but I guess that what the heir does, right? I kinda like them both. And Baby George is King Henry 8 incarnated, I swear!! Let’s hope he treats women better.

  5. Chris says:

    Kind of at a tangent, but: all I know of this couple is from pics in Hello magazine- very much in their favour. It’s been interesting to read quite contradictory reactions here. Not pro/anti royals, I mean specifically about the Cambridges’ image. I had no idea there were concerns about their work ethic or lack thereof, for example.
    Anyhow… fashion. I read a sobering piece recently about current ‘Alexander McQueen’ clothes (Guardian). Isn’t it SO true that all these nifty coats and dresses are galaxies away from the McQueen of Daphne Guinness and Issy Blow? Imagine Kate wearing original McQueen! That would sure scare the Queen’s corgis.

    • bluhare says:

      Worlds away from McQueen when Alexander was at the helm.

    • LAK says:

      I’m a McQueen fangirl, so I’ve never been happy with Kate wearing the label because she’s essentially asked them to make Sloane clothes that you can find anywhere and slap their label on it. I’d have forgiven her if she had the gumption to wear clothing that truly represented the label. It doesn’t even have to be the Isabella Blow end of the scale, one of their suits would do. Not this…..

      I nearly fainted (yes!!!!) when I walked into their store and found a DVF-esque wrap dress. Had to walk out and look at the store front to make sure it was a McQueen store.

      That said, I can’t believe how quickly and easily the label has moved away from his vision.

      On a brighter note, ‘Savaga BeautyK is coming to the V&A. The Baroness and I have a date to attend when it opens, don’t we Baroness?

      • bluhare says:

        We do, LAK!! I love London in the springtime . . . oh wait.

      • M.A.F. says:

        I must say that I don’t follow fashion as well as others but how many women have been in charge of the label since his death? One or two? I thought the one woman who did take over right away did keep inline with his vision and now there is another person in charge who isn’t

      • bluhare says:

        I think it’s been Sarah Burton since his death, and no one else. She was his No. 1 before he died, I think, and she moved up and helms the label now. LAK, is that right?

      • Reece says:

        HA, LAK, I had that same reaction when I saw her wedding dresses back in ’11. I think I’ve reached the acceptance phase now.

      • LAK says:

        Reece: i’ve been hoping for years that whatever Sarah Burton was doing for Kate wouldn’t seep into the label. I remember she gave an interview soon after taking over in which she said that she wanted to make the label lighter, softer and more feminine.

        Well…i’d say that’s what she has done. A DVF/McQueen wrap dress!!!!!

        That wrap dress, that wouldn’t look out of place at DVF, is the point where I officially give up on McQueen. They should re-name the label, Sarah Burton. No reference to McQueen. And good luck to her for not having to go the hard route of establishing her own line instead of piggy backing and watering down someone else’s line.

        And what Kate wears now is what you find in the McQueen store.

        Bluhare: Yes.

      • Chris says:

        Jeez that’s pretty grim LAK, that all of Lee’s vision’s obliterated now. I’m obviously no expert but it all seems an odd way to go about things unless the next step is renaming the line after SB. By no means trying to canonise the original, more that it’s so misleading! (Though I expect Dior and a few others would have more cogent contributions on the theme than I.)

      • TG says:

        I have always wondered how a label can continue after the designer has died. As you stayed Sarah Burton’s vision of McQueen is not what he had in mind. I am not a fashion expert but even I can see the difference. Same goes for Lagerfeld over at Chanel. He has ruined the line.

    • SK says:

      Actually I believe McQueen started out as Charles’ suit maker. He also used to make pieces for Diana to wear that were not his main line/aesthetic. So really; this is in keeping with what he did. I don’t think Burton is as talented as him; but she isn’t claiming to be. A lot of her main line McQueen stuff is great and very in keeping with his aesthetic.

  6. Frida_K says:

    Well, at least she didn’t flash her undercarriage and give one of the older gentleman a cardiac arrest, bless her heart.

  7. whipmyhair says:

    I’ve always thought that William would have been a great prince 200 years ago. Separated from the public, no real expectation to do anything. He could hunt and shoot and whore all he wanted and it would be expected of him.

    But nowadays, we mere mortals expect our royals to live a life of service through charity, raising awareness and rewarding those deserving. The fact that his 83 (?) year old granny works full time, going to multiple events every day and meeting with the PM and talking to other heads of state should be a source of embarrassment for him.

    A man in the prime of his life; old enough to know who he is, and young enough to have energy and passion is capable of so much good. But instead he and Kate wastes an oppourtunity that I know some bitches here would be very happy to do.

    A life of luxury AND you get to work for charity?! Being able to influence politicians and policy makers and wear designer clothes and diamonds?

    I’d swap my privacy to be able to have a life like that. It makes me sad to see them waste an oppourtunity to do good in this world, but I guess they are too self centred to care.

    • Shelby says:

      I couldn’t agree with you more. The Cambridges should be ashamed that they exert little efforts in royal duties and raising funds for charities. The Queen and Prince Philip are in 88 and 93 respectively yet they are still very active. Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall are also very active in promoting their charities and doing royal duties. They are all senior citizens but they have more engagements than the Cambridges which is a shame. Granted, Prince William is the 2nd-in-line but he is at the prime of his life and the least he can do is make an effort. He is becoming unpopular as the years go by. If this continue, the end of the British monarchy is inevitable.

      • the original bellaluna says:

        Lady Diana would be so disappointed!

      • Aeryn39 says:

        I was chatting this weekend with friends after pics of the Epsom Derby were released. I was explaining to them who Princess Alexandra and Prince Michael of Kent were. I did another one of my court circular searches and found that Princess Alexandra, 77 and despite her RA, completed almost the same number of engagements as Kate since January 1, 2014 – and that includes all of the tour engagements. In 2012, before her health took a turn for the worse, Princess Alexandra completed 110 official engagements.

        It’s stuff like this that plucks my nerves when I hear about how “hard” Kate works…

        I also found that Princess Diana completed something close to 100 public engagements in 1984 despite the birth Prince Harry. I couldn’t find the numbers for her first two full years of Royal service. I just don’t get how anyone buys the spin anymore.

        That said, I really like the McQueen coat dress on her. But that may just be because it’s work appropriate and there is no danger of another mooning…

        I agree with @whipmyhair that William would have been a perfect prince 200 years ago. He’d lightening years better than Albert Victor, eldest son of Edward VII. But thankfully it was his younger brother who became George V. I guess i just don’t get given his mother’s example, why William and by extension Kate don’t work harder? I mean, I would think getting a blow out and shopping would get boring after a while?

      • FLORC says:

        Aeryn
        A person can be content shopping and getting beauty treatments when they lack substance. I think that’s part of her issue.

    • Tx says:

      +1. As an American I find the monarchy to be totally useless and a waste of tax dollars, but the LEAST Will and Kate could do is pretend to be grateful for their life. At least the Queen tries to be useful.

    • bluhare says:

      I agree with you too. I think Kate looks lovely and carries herself beautifully, and if that’s all you expect from someone in her position, she does it beautifully. As long as you don’t expect her to do it often.

      But I can’t believe she doesn’t exploit her position more. She could spearhead some incredible initiatives if she chose; ones that the palace would approve of, true, but still. The good she could do!

      • Chris says:

        I admitted earlier I know only the Hello coverage of W&K, but from that I see she does have a portfolio of good causes, and with a twist I noticed, into the arts, that perhaps seeks to redress the image of Philistinism attaching to the royals, particularly the unfortunat but earnest Charles. I suppose she has to watch it in terms of quantity too, or risk being seen as neglecting the infant!
        I do agree though… she is perfectly positioned to do so much good, within her very circumscribed role. It’s my feeling that it’s Chazza, rather than her husband (nice but dim?) who will encourage her in this, he who witnessed Diana’s effect.

      • LAK says:

        Chris, on paper, particularly when it’s Hello paper, she has a nice portfolio of patronages for whom she works very hard and is an asset to every single organisation. Bearing in mind that this is the way Hello reports on every single person that appears in their pages.

        The reality is in the end of year engagement Tally where appearances, which include internal meetings and in the case of WK airport comings/goings, where you see that they barely work and always have the lowest numbers for a couple who currently have no other jobs to occupy their time.

        There are also the occasional leaks eg EACH having to cancel it’s fundraiser for lack of interest, Kate pulling out of a charity when the invites had already been sent and blaming the mix up on the charity – BTW this happened again afew days ago though it won’t receive any publicity, and so many other little things that together add up to show that the pages of Hello are good for propaganda.

      • Chris says:

        Oh Lak I know I ‘m being fed fluffy nonsense by Hello,, and I’m sincere in saying that I’m glad to read what’s actually going on now. ‘Glad’ is the wrong word of course, as I am in fact appalled. I admit to a pretty hard to justify affection for the senior royals, and I indulge my interest more than I should, but this stuff about W&K is a revelation. (God only knows what excuses a person with a brain for relying on Hello for info- I shall desist) Thanks for the heads-up.

      • hmmm says:

        @Chris,

        How is Charles a Philistine? It’s the Dolittles who are the Philistines. Charles is steeped in the arts and culture, whether it’s the Highgrove gardens, the art pieces within, commissioning new music, opera, architecture, the Prince’s Trust; he even shows a passion for doing watercolours.

        What, pray tell, have the dubious duo shown an interest in besides sports, slaughtering tender creatures by the bushel, glad-handing celebrities, lazing on a beach, and pretending to be ‘normal’?

      • AM says:

        Bluhare,
        Honestly what upsets me is she appears to have negligible interest in public service. No desire to work for her country, no desire to show thanks to the country that provided her with that wedding, that has provided her homes.

        I know she interviewed at galleries in her 20s, she could have put her Art Historg degree to work at any nationally-funded museum at any point before or during her marriage. I honestly would cut them so much slack if she did something like this and William worked for the Foreign Service until they become Prince and Princess of Wales.

      • Chris says:

        Arrgh, HMM… I messed up that remark. I don’t think Chazza is any kind of Philistine, I am a quite demented fan of his. I had in mind a vicious attack on the whole family and the PoW in particular, by Martin Amis. It was so cruel, though as an Amis fan I should not have been upset. I should have made it clear that I don’t share that opinion. ;And as for W&K, I was thinking only of the NPG and sn schools art project.)
        But let me reiterate my sincere allegiance to Charles, I think he’s altogether admirable.

      • hmmm says:

        @Chris,
        Thanks for clarifying. I, too, am a fan of Charles as a royal, his admirable sense of duty. He’s also made something worthwhile of his life, and all that endless waiting. He’s not a cipher.

      • Chris says:

        HMMM hi, so nice to meet a Charles person! I do get quite hurt for him over the constant sniping at his good intentions.
        He embodies for me the rare trait, among the super-privileged, of accepting that the whole deal has only a discretionary price attached; and he chooses to repay in full. Like HMQ of course.

      • bluhare says:

        AM, I think we’re in total agreement. Can you imagine what we could do? I would love it and if Kate reads Celebitchy, I’d like to volunteer to do all her volunteer work for me. She’ll just have to let me stay at KP somewhere and I’m good to go.

      • bluhare says:

        Volunteer work for HER!!!! (Can’t edit; sorry!)

  8. Jaded says:

    That Buzzfeed article is spot on. I think The loss of his mother, the subsequent coddling from his father and the hands-off treatment he got from the press after her death, has left him thinking he can live in his own bubble, treat the press with as much contempt as he wants, and control what he does (or doesn’t do) with his royal life, all the time living it largely at the expense of the tax-paying public.

    The fact that he chose someone like Kate, a commoner, a malleable, vapid girl with no aspirations other than to be William’s wife, shop and pamper herself, shows that he deliberately didn’t want someone who would throw herself into charity work, which let’s face it is what the BRF must do to stay relevant.

    Those two are an anachronism in today’s monarchy – remote, idle, living a lavish life without making much effort to make life better for their constituents. I expected better of William – no wonder Harry, despite his occasional lapses into boorish playfulness, is so much more popular. He actually works hard and seems to enjoy it.

  9. zut alors! says:

    William really does resemble the wascally wabbit in some of these pics. I think it’s the big teefs. What’s up, doc?

  10. bluhare says:

    Well that Buzzfeed article was interesting. Wonder which courtiers she sourced for it? I think I know the answer!

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      This reads like an OpEd think piece, not a sourced open letter. There aren’t enough details there that aren’t already common knowledge, unlike the courtier leaked Richard Kay piece, which was awesome. It was still an interesting read, however.

      • bluhare says:

        I know, that’s why I asked a rhetorical question. She writes the article as if she has a direct line to courtiers at the palace, which if she did she’d lose it in a heartbeat after writing (and publishing) something like that.

        Her style is remarkably like a blog that doesn’t seem to be updated any longer. Royal psychotic gossip or something like that.

      • Sharon Lea says:

        Dame – which article was that from Richard Kay? The title Prince William is wobbling over a choice…?

      • Chris says:

        I’d patent (? wrong term?) that splendid title pronto. Royal Psychotic Gossip? Sign me up :) )

      • justme says:

        The same person who used to write “Royal Gossip Psychotic” is now writing the Buzzfeed blog.

        She posts on Royal Gossip constantly and always writes as though she is “in the know” – she is not. One thing about her is that she is always in tears for the “poor courtiers”. That is the sure indication that it is the same person.

        That and the fact that she admitted she is the writer.

    • JulieM says:

      I, for one, would love to know the answer. The Buzzfeed article was interesting. I must agree.

    • Suze says:

      I could barely get through the Buzzfeed article. I think the Richard Kay piece of last week was more enlightening, and mined the same territory.

      My takeaway from this appearance is that Kate is much better with old folks than kids (she’s not horrible with children, but not nearly the “natural” her fans would have her be), and that I wouldn’t want to be stuck on a hot dais for hours in a heavy suit.

      And I know she likes her hair down, I know it is her signature style. But in the heat and outdoors I think it would be much smarter to have it up, off her neck and out of the way.

    • hmmm says:

      Heh. IIRC, no one takes that site seriously. She sounds like someone in the know, but it’s all in the seemingly authoritative, persuasive styling. Pure bunk threaded with known facts. I put it up there with snake oil selling.

  11. kristen says:

    My take away from that Buzzfeed article was that the courtiers are super bitchy and full of drama. Maybe all this drama is why they are shying away from royal life? I know I wouldn’t be able to deal with that on a daily basis. Especially with a new baby to focus on.

  12. SoCal says:

    I had a feeling she would repeat this coat or the Michael Kors coat she wore for ANZAC Day. This coat was an excellent choice. Now, I’m not sure about this hat. I watched a video of their visit on @britishroyals twitter page and I saw Rebecca Deacon’s hat which would’ve been a better choice for Kate.

    Also on the video was William’s speech which I thought was delivered very well. I forgot how deep his voice is, kinda sexy lol

  13. vava says:

    I think the Buzzfeed article is a bunch of junk, even though I’m not a fan of either Will or Kate. I just don’t think that article is factual.

    I think that was a good idea that she didn’t wear something new to the D Day observances. That coat is practically new. I like the back of coat, just not the type of belt or those big saddlebag pockets. The hat looked ridiculous, like Mickey Mouse ears. She really needs a new hairdresser because the exposed rubber band looked really tacky.

    Considering how poor her posture is now, it makes me wonder what she’ll look like in a few years. The Hunchback of Cambridge?

  14. katy says:

    Nice too see that the Buzzfeed article blames Kate for Williams issues. It’s always the woman behind the man that’s at fault. No mind to the fact that William is a grown man who can make his own decisions and receive help with anything he needs, nope his faltering behavior and popularity is his wife’s fault.

    Sure okay. Makes sense.

    • K Sharry says:

      That’s something that’s always bothered me about criticism of Kate- after all the years of waity-ing I honestly believe she was willing to do pretty much whatever to stay with William, and if he wanted her to be a full time working royal she would have put much more effort into it. Now, she could chose to work more on her own, and that would be great, but I tend to think she bows to William’s decisions about their life. I also don’t think he would have married her if she were the type to take a lead in organizing appearances for them- from the beginning he’s tried to keep her away from royal life.
      Besides, its not her job to train Will to behave how the courtiers want. The family obviously already failed at that.
      I think they are both naturally lazy people who are inclined to use all that money to “live normally” (obviously without any understanding of what “normal” is).

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      Suze
      Exactly this.

    • Bohemia says:

      I noticed that on top of blaming Kate for William’s problems, the author of the Buzzfeed piece also found space to shade Kate’s parenting. Nice. (And by nice I mean, not nice.)

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Horrible, imo. Motherhood may turn out to be the only thing Kate excels at. I think she’s a good mom.

      • mel says:

        Didn’t it just make reference to the fact that she has multiple nannies and isn’t that common knowledge? Unless you follow her around 24/7, how can you say she’s a great mom? A few well-orchestrated photo ops mean nada.

      • myra says:

        Bohemia, I’ve read a lot worse concerning her mothering skills, but perhaps they are merely trying to say that with an army of help – which she doesn’t hesitate to use – the image of the regular mom Kate is trying to sell is patently false.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        HH
        I said that I think Kate is a good mom – that is an opinion so first hand, personal knowledge is not required. And the article didn’t just mention that Kate has nannies. It intimates that she uses the nannies to actually raise her son because she can’t be bothered and she finds the daily activities involved with child-rearing to be too messy. From what I have read/observed I think she is probably a fun, affectionate mom to little George. I don’t see her changing diapers too often but I don’t see her as the type to let an employee replace her as the emotional and maternal center of her child’s life, either.

      • Suze says:

        In the absence of any proof otherwise, I’ll say she’s a good mom. She comes from a family that is close and seems very loving, and I don’t get the impression that she herself is a cold person.

        I just don’t think its quite on to judge a woman’s parenting when you have no idea what she actually does as a mother.

  15. Chris says:

    I agree, it’s just someone’s bitterness raving away, there are too many moments of near hysteria in it for us to read it as a dispassionate commentary. And the super-popular online newspaper mentioned is no doubt the renowned misogynistic guilt trip that is far better avoided than read for facts. That’s the vibe I got by reading the link….a ‘news source’ feels slighted by not being treated as an insider/’courtier’. (Or maybe it was Mr L the designer, miffed at Kate for not attending his charity bash!)

  16. aquarius64 says:

    Given the occasion and her position, I think Duchess Kate looks fine. I still don’t understand why people want and expect her to run up a clothing bill or sex it up when she’s out. I call this a response to Bum-gate; you know the queen told her no Marilyn moments, especially at this event.

  17. Jessica says:

    If she had worn something new, the story would be all about her clothes. Repeating an outfit, and a relatively new one, ensured the focus stayed in the veterans. So I like that she didn’t wear something new.

  18. bettyrose says:

    I neglected to comment on Friday’s post about the Queen, but the her green hat/coat are to die for. I realize I’ll need to mortgage my house in order to copy her look, but do tell where she shops.

    Okay, that Buzzfeed article is curious. I’m not sure how reliable it is, and I question that they put all the blame on Kate, but does William have a legitimate and documented phobia? Like his great-grandfather or just a distaste for public appearances?

    • Suze says:

      The queen has a dressmaker, Angela Kelly, dedicated to her who does much of her clothes. I’m not sure if Kelly is responsible for the green coat dress. There are definitely mixed reviews of Kelly’s creations.

    • LadySlippers says:

      •bettyrose•

      The buzzfeed article isn’t very reliable at all. There are numerous errors that any long term royal watcher or reputable journalist would know or double check before publishing. For example, courtiers aren’t going to quit ‘en masse’ because one royal is a pain in the a$$. William isn’t the first stubborn royal nor will he be the last either — all courtiers know this.

      As someone else pointed out above — it’s someone’s opinion (and not a terribly informed one either) with a few known facts and lots and lots of mistakes.

      Read Richard Kay’s recent article for contrast. It’s both well written and clearly well informed.

  19. Patty Cake says:

    If the Buzzfeed is true, i don’t see why William just doesn’t gracefully step down and give up his position in line to the throne. Maybe he could ask Harry to take it, but I don’t reckon Harry would want it either. And if Harry doesn’t want it then they should just do away with the Dynasty altogether. I think its crazy. Neither the Courtiers or any royal staff should have to put up with disgusting attitudes from the BRAF. They especially shouldn’t have to deal with any crass behavior from Kate. So sad. Read on one of the Daily Mail links from a commenter that she wears a smug whenever curtsied to. That sh!ts pathetic.

    • bluhare says:

      If LadySlippers comes around, she’ll school you on that one. :)

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Blu•

        I’m teaching today???? Geesh, you could have at least *called* a head of time and told me!

        *walks away grumbling*

        😉

      • Patty Cake says:

        Thanks bluhare, FLORC, Hannah, Dame SnarkWeek, Lady Slippers, m, Chris, and bettyrose,
        I feel so much better, especially after reading Lady Slippers’ post above. I sure hope their not a complete pain in the royal arse to work for. As I want to like William because he has his mother’s eyes and nose, but that post made me completely rethink it. Yet, I still believe him to be short tempered. Another thing, I was viewing some youtube videos yesterday night. The footman and maids had been interviewed, I believe they were old employees of the BRAF, any way the old employees spoke on some ill treatment that they’d received from the BRAF, such as, Prince Charles choking one of his footman after yanking a sink out of the wall, does anyone know if this is true?

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Patty Cake•

        All Royals*, whether they be British, Moroccan, Swedish, Jordanian, Spanish, Japanese, or Dutch, are human. And as human beings — we all have some unpleasant qualities.

        Charles is known to have a temper and while I cannot say whether that particular incident is true (I’d actually lean towards no), I’ve heard of others that probably are true. That one seems a bit too over the top for me to believe but I’m also not dismissing it out of hand either.

        I *always* keep in mind I’m discussing human being when gossiping (royal or otherwise) because if someone only catalogued my worst traits, I wouldn’t come across very favourably either.

        *For simplicity sake, I used ‘Royals’ even though many countries have Imperial, Royal, Grand Ducal, and Princely families and are not all strictly ‘Royals’ per se.

    • FLORC says:

      Patty Cake
      William will never imo step down from his role. He may resent his future responsibilities, but he is well coddled in his world of protection and status. If he were to ste aside not only would the press have a field day on him. Especially since he has often tried to control what they say and cover on his, but also that he would be used to promote the new future King. He would become the greater of 2 evils.
      This will never happen.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      What FLORC said.

    • hannah says:

      Harry would have killed him and he can’t take George out the line now.

      • bettyrose says:

        Isn’t George next in line after William no matter what? The only way Harry would be king at this point is if George leaves the line of succession (by choice or circumstance) without first producing an heir. Am I wrong?

      • Chris says:

        BettyRose yes, Harry’s safe! (Did I only imagine him actually giving voice to that sentiment when Good Prince George was born? )
        The greatest worry re the succession was while the Duke of York was second in line, until Wm was born. Nail-biting day they were too! I exaggerate for dramatic effect but still, phew, really.

      • m says:

        Bettyrose- if Will steps aside before George is 18, that takes George out of the running too since you can’t have someone who has nothing to do with the royal life raising a future king.

      • bettyrose says:

        M – Is that true? So George isn’t the heir in his own right until he safely turns 18? In the modern world, that makes sense, but younger monarchs have been crowned in history. I can see how the Middletons would never be allowed to raise him, but he’ll be off to boarding school at age 8 – with lengthy holidays at Sandringham & Balmoral – so there isn’t really a need for any one adult to have primary custody of a royal child past age 8.

      • Chris says:

        Ladyslippers:
        Tongue v much in cheek I assure you, I’ve lived with them, as it were, long enough to believe that we won’t see another 1936, let alone a power struggle. (I do share Charles’ sense of silly humour, reared on the Goon Show, which explains a great deal!)

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Chris•

        Got it! LOL

        Would make a great story though, right? Lots of juicy subplots! 😜

    • LadySlippers says:

      •Patty Cake•

      I actually think William would love and adore to step away as a Royal. I know I’m totally in the minority here but I do. He wants to live a life that he dictates and be the master of his own destiny. And as a Royal, he does not control his life and that frustrates him to no end. Plus, he’d still be rich and live quite well — Royal life really doesn’t ‘add’ anything for him.

      However, in order for him remove himself (abdicate is strictly a word when someone already is the Sovereign), a bill would need to be drawn up for him (or anyone) to remove him/them-self from the Line of Succession. And that bill would need to to encompass ALL the countries that the BRF are head of. So it’d need to be drawn up *AND* become law in the UK and the entire Commonwealth. The current law changing primogeniture has not passed yet so it’s not an easy task by any stretch of the imagination.

      The reason I think we see William delaying the inevitable is because creating a law like this is both a daunting challenge and terribly disappointing to his family. He knows both his parents worked hard to create a modern prince AND his grandmother would be devastated if he went the route her Uncle David took.

      He’s in a terrible catch-22 that he doesn’t know how to fix. And no one (the courtiers, the BRF) is willing to sit down and have a heart to heart with him to see what and how he would honestly like his life to be. Plus, no ones wants to even entertain the idea that the best thing might be to have William ‘removed’ from the Line of Succession for fear of upsetting QEII. Everyone tip-toes around it and that’s not good for anyone — including William, HM, or the people he represents.

      As for the Line of Succession, my gut is that William would ask his entire line be exempted if he went this route. He hates this lifestyle — why would he curse his children with it? That’s only my gut and I could totally be wrong. (I say this because in reality he could make sure the bill and subsequent law are created in a way to remove any and all of his children from the Line as well).

      As for Harry, he might not want it but his sense of duty is strong (as is all the Yorks’), he’d step up to the plate if asked.

      • Peri says:

        I always learn something from you LadySlippers! :)

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Peri•

        Thank you! 😊

        I promise you I’m always learning myself!!!

      • Patty Cake says:

        Many thanks Lady Slippers, You are completely right. The BRAF advisors don’t want to have a real heart-to- heart with William, and to be totally honest, I don’t blame them. I think a conversation like that should be brought up by either his friends or family. However, I know that QEII won’t bring it up because she’s from the school of the hard knocks, meaning she may believe that William should just shut his trap and do the job because it’s what she had to do after all. I couldn’t imagine the amount of backlash he would get from both his close and extended family. Although I can imagine the public’s reaction would be tremendous. I believe the one that would be the most understanding would be Harry, even though, he would be the one who would have to pick up all of the slack. Harry seems more cool headed of the two. I hope Kate becomes a bit more supportive because her husband sure needs the support.

      • bluhare says:

        i think a lot of us have said that, LS, so you won’t get piled on here.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Patty Cake•

        Before I neglect it a second time (sorry!) — you are ever so welcome.

        To respond to some of your points, I DO blame the courtiers (The Grey Men) and the BRF for not addressing this because tap dancing around issues helps no one. (For the record, I’m a big fan of being blunt and honest though). Because everyone keeps shoving this under the rug, the issue is only growing and not subsiding.

        QEII is definitely old-school duty wise. But everyone needs to call William out for his dilly-dallying INCLUDING (and most importantly) his grandparents and his father. It should not be one veteran Royal reporter that has to be the bearer of bad news….

        To echo Richard Kay:

        Queen and country deserve it.

      • bettyrose says:

        Thanks, LadySiippers! This clears up my rambling series of questions above.

      • Chris says:

        Wow, there’s a rich seam to mine for fantasy ‘what-iffery’ there, if Wm were to step aside. You could forsee a new Bourbon-style rivalry between the families of opposing brothers: George’s who insist that his birthright be honoured, a newly-eligible York daughter arguing that Wm’s removal should encompass all his heirs, some girlfriend trying to convince Harry to fight for a crown he doesn’t want, and so on. And somewhere in it all there should be Joan Collins, scheming on her own behalf! Indeed, it could be a TV series….. :)
        Seriously though, and my real comment: please let’s pray that no more princes are sent to boarding school. Too cruel, I still remember Charles’ misery.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Blu•

        Very very true. (Tru Blu!) ☺️

        But there’s also a large number that honestly thinks William loves all the ‘perks’ of royalty when, in reality, there’s far more downsides than perks.

        •bettyrose•

        As always, you are so very welcome. 😊

        •Chris•

        The legal entanglements are vast and tricky. You could probably argue, and decently too, whether or not a removal from succession would include only the primary person OR that person’s whole line. Yikes! What a nightmare, right? But knowing the BRF, all the possible ‘what-ifs’ would be dealt with at the time of removal/abdication. You should peruse the legal docs from David’s abdication, they are *absolutely* fascinating.

        However, I honestly think there are several myths from history that no longer have much relevance today and one of many is the idea that anyone, men or women, are clamouring for the crown (or even a title). I can quote quite a few people that have said exactly what I just did. Especially men that are born princes and are trying to talk women into dating and eventually marrying them. Women will sometimes date them (bedding them is another matter) but almost all women bulk at marriage to a prince.

        Julia Stiles starred in a movie about a prince hiding his royal connections in order to be seen as normal. He wanted to hopefully fall in love and not have the women scared off by his royal status. It was based on several modern princes who also hid who they were in order to date and (hopefully) marry women who could see past their baggage.

        But people (and most importantly the press) still buy the fairytales and the power struggles of days past — they just don’t hold much water today.

      • Marmaduke45 says:

        While still a fairly new devotee to Celebitchy (I’m always late to the party) , and have only ventured to post a handful of times, I just wanted to say, LadySlippers, that your posts are consistently some of the most well written and articulate posts I read on this site. As with any good blog, the comments section is always where the action is…and your posts are thoughtful and detailed. I think I’ve learned more about the BRF in the past 12 months than everything I’ve accumulated since I got up in the middle of the night 33 years ago to watch Charles and Diana get married. The caffeine is kicking in and I’m at risk of blathering on, but I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoy reading your posts. :-) Take care.

      • LadySlippers says:

        •Marmaduke•

        Oh why thank you! 😊

        *blushes so deeply that I’m no longer a Showy Pink and White LadySlipper but a Deep Crimson LadySlipper*

        I hope you and everyone can ‘see and hear’ my deep reverence for the British Royal Family and other royals.

        Thank you again for your kind words.

  20. hoopjumper says:

    Question from an American: what is all this “training” the BuzzFeed article emphasizes at the end? I am sure there is a lot more to these events then showing up and looking nice, but really, the article makes it sound like they’re prepping to perform surgery. What am I missing? What does it entail?

  21. Kristen says:

    I don’t understand coatdresses.

    And is it even the right season to wear one? In June?!

  22. the original bellaluna says:

    Is her weave too tight or something? She’s always got a hand in her hair.

  23. CeltLady says:

    Not really a fan of anything Royal, however the fact that she kissed the WWII vet is very sweet. I like that Wills faked jealousy, too. Probably made the old man’s day.

  24. wow says:

    The Buzzfed article reads as if some random fan from one of the royal fan boards wrote it, so I wouldn’t put any stock into that one as to what is really by going on.

  25. Montréalise says:

    The Buzzfeed article is fascinating. I think I understand why Kate has so many wardrobe malfunctions (i.e. Bumgates): she resents the fact that she has to attend official functions and go on royal tours, and this is her way of subtly letting the courtiers know it. Pure passive-aggression.

  26. Aurelia says:

    My mother is all over waity kate. She told me that apparently kate’s charities are appalled with her disinterest but they are in a bind because its would be totally not kosher to ask her to step down.