Duchess Kate is ‘less than pleased’ about William’s Verbier shenanigans

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at a reception following the unveiling and dedication of an Iraq and Afghanistan Memorial in London

While I await the release of St. Patrick’s Day photos of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Irish Guards shamrock thing, please enjoy this story. As we now know, Prince William’s four-day Verbier ski trip has ended up being one gigantic PR mess. Which is no surprise to me, considering William has the PR instincts of a rock and he hires sycophants and Yes Men to work in his press office. So it’s kind of unfair that now Kate is taking a “PR hit” from William’s drunken extravaganza. There are rumors that William was not acting like a married man with this trip, and there might be a “kiss and tell” coming out. So what does Kate really think about all this? Thankfully, Kate’s resident hagiographer Katie Nicholl wrote a story for Vanity Fair yesterday in which she theorized about Kate’s reaction to William’s Verbier shenanigans. My general thought is that Nicholl is a Middleton mouthpiece, and this is aiming to paint Kate as someone in a position to “disapprove.”

One wouldn’t want to be in Prince William’s (dancing) shoes right now. Dubbed “throne idle” in the British press after skipping a Commonwealth Day service earlier this week in order to go skiing with friends, the 34-year-old royal is also understood to be in the dog house with his wife.

Kate is said by Royal Watch sources to be understandably “less than pleased” that her husband has been filmed partying with his friends and an unidentified woman. The new footage, which emerged Wednesday in several tabloids, shows Prince William singing and dancing with friends during a boys-only skiing trip. Shot at the popular Farinet nightclub in Verbier, the video also shows the prince putting his hand on the waist of a mystery woman.

“It was William’s choice to go away, but make no mistake Kate wears the trousers in their marriage, and she won’t be happy with William’s antics. She thought his partying days and larking around with the boys was a thing of the past. I imagine she’ll find this humiliating and William will have come in for a pasting,” says a source.

Last February, the Cambridges posed on the slopes of Courchevel where they enjoyed their first family ski holiday with George and Charlotte. This year, in contrast, William opted to hit the slopes solo with a group of male friends who included Guy Pelly, James Meade, and Tom Van Straubenzee. Kate, who’s not a big drinker, is apparently not the only wife said to be annoyed. Guy Pelly, whose other half, Lizzie Wilson, is about to give birth, is according to a source also “in deep trouble.”

[From Vanity Fair]

One, I hate the “lads will be lads” vibe of this because it furthers William’s “I’m just a normal bloke” thing. He’s not a normal bloke, and this isn’t just some bloke’s wife being super-mad that he drank a case of beer while watching the game. As for whether Kate is truly “less than pleased” – I believe that she’s displeased. Many of you have said this week that Kate is used to William cheating on her because he was unfaithful throughout their decade together pre-marriage (The Waity Years). I believe that she’s “put up” with a lot, but I also believe this is something different, because William is being SO blatant and public about it.

The Daily Mail’s Jan Moir has a cloying piece about Kate as well, and how William has made Kate look like “a dull afterthought” (cough) and poor Kate’s fairy tale is ruined by William’s loutish behavior. Which is true, but… are we saying that Kate believed the fairy tale? I think Kate lost her fairy tale ideals long ago, because she had to put up with so much while she had her eye on the prize: becoming a princess. And here’s an uncomfortable opinion: what I’ve always thought about Kate is that she believes that if worse comes to worst, she’ll be able to play the victim like Diana did and get the people on her side. But as we know, she’s no Diana. And I suspect that if worse comes to worst, people really aren’t going to be that sympathetic to either of them.

The Duchess of Cambridge visiting Action for Children projects supporting vulnerable families in Wales

The Duchess of Cambridge visits two Action for Children projects supporting vulnerable families in Wales

Photos courtesy of WENN, Pacific Coast News.


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

205 Responses to “Duchess Kate is ‘less than pleased’ about William’s Verbier shenanigans”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Indira says:

    The people on the DM kiss his a$$ in the comment sections. I just don’t understand royalists.

  2. Shambles says:

    Compared to the optics of last years ski trip, this really is a stark contrast, isn’t it? It’s like last year we got a taste of what Kate wants us to believe about their family, and this year we see how it really is. Idk, I thought this would be one of those stories that would just blow over eventually, but it seems like something serious might come of this. Damn.

    • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

      That in part that has to do with the press. They are a bit like a dog with a bone over it. There are 3 outlets so far that has gotten exclusives on videos/photos: The Sun, TMZ and the Fail. That indicates that there is a bigger story, a story that’s more than drunken dancing and harmless flirting. Plus there is the resentment that he (and her) have built up with the press, esp the UK media. They dislike him as much as he dislikes them.

      On top of all that, there is the fact that Granny and Dad have not even bothered to cover this up, they’ve been covering up his indiscretions for years. Its very very telling that they haven’t – this is their dysfunctional way of disciplining him.

      • LAK says:

        It’s incredible that neither Grannie nor Daddy has killed this story yet.

        They’ve blocked Harry and Princess Sparkle’s balcony pictures being published, and that’s a rare thing in defending the spare over the heir. Exception Andrew, but as well know, that’s a special case.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        @LAK – Blocking the Harry/Meghan photos makes me think that there could be plans going on to prep Harry for Kingship. It feels like William has pushed Granny and Dad too far and the Commonwealth Day event was the last straw. It could be that they are going to try and make William walk away of his own accord, pushing him out would be a battle. But maybe am reading to much into it.

      • bluhare says:

        The press has some doozies. “Cannonball of cringe” is genius!!

      • Cee says:

        It’s been no secret that the Queen prefers Harry. The Monarchy might protect William (up until now… perhaps) but the Queen has given Harry a RVO (unlike William who got his Orders because of his position as Charles’ Heir) and free reign to set up his charities. She even shows up to support him.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I was thinking that maybe Gran and Chaz have actually tried but 1) he was just too damn public about it and 2) the press is over it. It used to be tit for tat, no? Or at least there was an understanding of whatever nature that certain things would not be published. The palace had some clout. But there’s no upside for the UK press to do that anymore. The kids are almost never brought out for cute pictures and if they are, half of these pics are released on Twitter. The Cambridges just don’t work enough to supply the press with those stories either. They’re too damn boring and crusty about the entire thing so why bother? And TMZ wouldn’t care anyway.

      • LAK says:

        Littlemissnaughty: Grannie managed to pull Andrew’s scandal with his pedo friend in 3 days.

        The story broke on a sunday worldwide, and by wednesday, 3 days later, was gone. No commentary from any media source, no companion op-eds, no columnists.

        Gossip blogs on the internet might mention it and internet commentors occassionally talk about it, and whilst the internet links haven’t been removed, you won’t find any discussion or rehash of it from the POV of Andrew.

        Every time it appears, having been framed slightly differently, it disappears immediately with no traction from the media.

        That demonstrates what can be accomplished when Grannie wants something.

        I think your point 2 is the reason as well as Grannie and Daddy being over it.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        LAK, I have no doubt that Grannie knows how to make stories disappear. But honestly, who cares that much about Andrew? Will’s antics were much easier to cover up when he was younger. A lot less was expected of him and they had Harry cast as the problematic one anyway. But these days Harry is looking pretty good and the Cambridges are definitely not looking good. At all. The press tried. To make Kate into a damn style icon, to cast them as the sytlish next chapter, the young and attractive next chapter. Well, that did not work. Then the kids came. And went. The Queen is seriously getting up there and won’t be around forever. And we know that Charles has a lot less influence with the press. Man, he must be so p*ssed off. The work he put into making everyone love him and Cam. And then the 35 year old man child goes rogue.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Many people cared that the unpopular royal “international business” advisor was caught being friends with a pedophile, and caught having sex with an underage girl who may or may not have been a sex slave. HM scrubbed it all away and gave him a new promotion. She’s choosing *not* to scrub this one away.

      • LAK says:

        The point isn’t whether any one cares about Andrew, but her ability to remove a story from the media when she wants to do it.

        William has many, many stories that were similarly killed. Or Harry was used as the decoy story such that William didn’t look so bad in comparison.

        This is the first time the UK media and especially, Grannie / Daddy, has not killed a naughty William story, and it’s unprecedented.

        William, not realising the level of protection he enjoys, thought he was teflon and or possibly doesn’t appreciate that everyone has reached the end of their tether with him and so are enjoying this press take down despite the actual offence being mild compared to his father/uncles/brother’s offences.

      • NatalieS says:

        I think it’s great Elizabeth and Charles haven’t stepped in. Let William really see how much he’s protected by the influence and power of his father and grandmother, and how much he lacks this kind of influence and skill when it comes to the press.

      • Tina says:

        Ooh, I love this whole thing. I am now thinking of HM as Grannie from the Americans. All hail Margo Martindale.

      • Amy says:

        Here for Princess Sparkle, too! Well done, LAK

    • Indiana Joanna says:

      Last year’s cheesy ski trip photos of Kate dusting W with snow as a show of cutesy wifely teasing was cringeworthy. I don’t think they are that happy with each other. But she has Carole and he can escape to his aging Peter Pan lad friends.

  3. Guest says:

    Kate and Wills won’t be a good Queen Consort and King but maybe the UK deserves that for treating him with kid gloves.

  4. Margo S. says:

    She looks so fake in those pictures! She really doesn’t come across as genuine, the way Diana did.

    And yeah, I hate the whole typical british mentality of “lads will be lads.” Bull sh!t. Stop with that. Don’t be a d!ck head and cheat on your partner. It’s like he doesn’t know how to be a gentleman. He doesn’t seem to be surrounded by many.

    • Clare says:

      I don’t think it is a ‘typical British mentality’ that justifies bad behaviour and cheating spouses!. Certainly it is played up in some circles and by some media outlets – but in my experience it is not typical.

      As far as I’m concerned, the whole ‘lad’ thing is kind of similar to the ‘frat boy’ thing – most people grow out of it, and manage to socialise with their friends (male and female), without being assholes.

    • Megan says:

      William’s binge drinking is a problem. It should not be brushed off as “lads will be lads.”

  5. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    Of course it will bother her – its all over the press. Its often been said she turns a blind eye if he’s discreet and only reacts when its all over the news. Saying that Tanna said in his tweets yesterday that Kate would ignore it but Carole wouldn’t.

    Its the video clips that I want to see, they tend to paint a truer picture of whats happening. William isn’t as good as Kate at hiding his emotions.

    Either way I’m looking forward to the Sunday press to read about the most boring and bland kiss and tell ever! He looks like a 2 pumps and a squirt kinda guy. LOL. I’m a mean person, i know.

  6. Jess says:

    I dunno, I just don’t think this is a big deal, yet. He looks like a drunk doofus dancing by himself, I’m waiting on more evidence before I brand him an alcoholic cheater.

    • Chaine says:

      Same here. If there was anything more it would have gotten out by now. I tend to think the most salacious thing that happened was him high-fiving that topless selfie girl. After galumphing alone around the dance floor, he probably stumbled back to his three-thousand dollar a night ski lodge, puked, and passed out fully clothed on the sofa. Alone. Then woke up with a hangover and found that Guy Pelly had drawn a mustache on him with a sharpie whilst he slept.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      I laughed at this and I think you are right. Not to say, he doesn’t look like an ass ’cause he does.

    • bluhare says:

      For me the issue is less the trip; that’s his and his wife’s business, really. It’s missing something because he wouldn’t cut it short to support his grandmother.

    • HappyMom says:

      No-I don’t think he’s an alcoholic, or a cheater-but missing Commonwealth Day and continuing to be work shy is the bigger deal.

      • hmmm says:

        Does his behaviour suggest a monogamous guy to you? His history suggests otherwise.

      • HappyMom says:

        @hmmm-all I see is a drunk guy dancing and talking to some women in a club that looks like it’s in someone’s basement. Do we see him making out with her? No. And honestly, if he’s cheating on her-that’s between he and Kate. I think his bigger issue is shirking his responsibilities to the Queen and doing his job.

      • Jess says:

        The only cheating I’ve ever heard of him doing is in comments on sites like this one, people assume he does and treat him accordingly, not saying he doesn’t, I have no real idea. I’ve just never seen it, and I’m genuinely asking if there is any hard evidence? Of course he’s lazy and ditches his royal duties more often than not, and the taxpayers are stuck paying for it, which is bs, but that’s another issue!

    • Amy says:

      I do believe the not so crazy conspiracy theory that these videos are out there with the Palace’s wishes because there is something larger. Normally William would be pitching an absolute fit at something like this – he has for far smaller things. We’re meant to think “oh, just a fun boys trip where he’s dancing like a drunken fool. So normal, blah, blah, blah.”

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        This. Still no word about Topless Selfie chick’s “missing” mobile phone.

        Or how/why it’s missing.

        Was it confiscated?

        Was it left under Wills’ bed?

        We’ll probably never know, but if it answers do come out the schadenfreude is going to be glorious.

    • aenflex says:

      Agree. He went out drinking. He danced. Maybe he spoke with members of the opposite sex. Kate should try kicking back sometime, too. She seems wound very tightly. I don’t subscribe to the whole royalty thing, so to me they’re just people. Perhaps not happily married people, but people all the same. And yes, I pay VAT.

  7. Sixer says:

    I just think they are both equally useless and should be excised from public life. I suppose I really only consider the state of their marriage if a) it increases the possibility of said excision, and b) I am a bad woman who enjoys sniggering at people I don’t like.

  8. Meow says:

    You marry for money you earn every cent!!

  9. Sarah says:

    I used to be a supporter of the British monarchy but I can’t take them seriously anymore. The young royals are really more like celebrities and I don’t think UK citizens should pay the bills for unemployed celebs.

  10. Mikasa says:

    I start to think PW’s goal is to destroy the monarchy. It’s quite obvious that he doesn’t want to be king and that he hates to attend royal duties.

  11. COSquared says:

    Gosh, that source sounds like Carole, doesn’t it ? I think Nicholl is still in contact with the family. I also hate this “lads will be lads” spin by the sugars (they can spin anything!), it perpetuates the belief that a married man, let alone an heir who skipped an engagement, can do anything without any criticism. If that was Kate standing there partying it up with unknown men, both sugars and critics would explode. Lads will be lads, my foot!

  12. BearcatLawyer says:

    I imagine Kate is extremely pissed at him. Their children will read about this someday.

  13. Lainey says:

    I agree with the less than pleased he was caught on camera part. She didn’t care what he did as long as he didn’t embarrass her. These videos (even if nothing happened) still look bad, which she will care about- not if he cheated.
    As for her wearing the pants – not a chance. Carole has more say in it then she does. It’s her he’ll get a bollicking from not Kate.
    As for if she’ll be able to play the victim no I don’t think so. From the engagement we were told how she was going in with her eyes open. Will said he waited so long so she’d be ready. No way will she be able to play the poor helpless victim and leaking that she’s in charge won’t help either. Not to mention she doesn’t have the love that people had for Diana.

    • addie says:

      Agree 100%. Kate simply has no warmth and is dull, dull, dull. In that regard, she is the polar opposite of Diana. What has Kate done to endear herself to the public? Nothing. Just a series of half-arsed appearances she can’t get away from quick enough, grotesque grins, and on the rare occasions she speaks, is embarrassingly inarticulate and barely understood because of her contrived accent.

  14. Ruby says:

    I wonder what Queen Carole is saying about all of this. Is she scolding Willy for his behaviour or just telling Waity to ignore and look the other way? I’d love to know her reactions to the headlines of the last few days.

  15. Who ARE These People? says:

    So Kate wears the jeggings in that family, eh?

    • Maria says:

      That surprised me too. I thought she was a doormat.

    • Mara says:

      That was the funniest bit of her article for me

    • notasugarhere says:

      That was also the story out of their first Canada tour, plus stories for years of her treatment of other women, staff, the Yorks. His complaints about her controlling behavior were leaked by his friends around their many breakups, cited as the reason for their public fights, plus his dancing on the table screaming “Free at Last!”

      I think neither of them is an easy person to live with. She’s controlling and wants what she wants (image, position, fame), he hates being under anyone’s thumb and wants what he wants (to live life as a bachelor under the veneer of Happy Families).

      Carole is there to keep the peace and patch things up because she wants the status of being his MIL, but that cannot work forever.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        I don’t think he even wants to live under the happy family facade – I think he just wants to live the life of a party frat boy. Many people close to him, family and friends, expressed surprised when he got married. Many said that they never expected him to settle down. He only did it under pressure from his own and her family.

        The marriage will go the same way his fathers did and will end in tears.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Being criticized in the press for stringing her along for a decade didn’t help. HM had serious doubts about non-working KM and the Middletons, it will all end in tears. I doubt Charles would pressure him to marry someone he didn’t love. He would pressure him to cut her off if he wasn’t going to marry her, as his own father did to him.

        I think William wanted to keep Mummy Carole and that meant marriage. The Middletons always enabled the facade while desperately wanting it to lead to marriage. The massive security upgrades at the Middletons new house (from the taxpayers) meant KM could be at mummy’s while William was elsewhere doing whatever. Similar to the Wales arrangement, where he was barely working and often gone. She was only papped a few times in Wales while being in London 3 days a week. The plan to be at her parents for months after the birth of the first child, etc.

        I also think he figured marriage was a dodge to avoid the increasing pressures that he become a full-time working royal. Marriage meant he would play years of “we must not work and we must live in the country to protect the children” games. And those games gave him another 5+ years of not really working.

      • Indiana Joanna says:

        I think the worst part for KM is that W’s drunken ski trip/apres ski behavior shines a light on the reality of their less than perfect marriage.

      • Princess says:

        Well William should be pleased that Kate hung around because nobody else he approached wanted to marry him and so he went back to Kate.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If he was pleased to be married to her, he wouldn’t spend all this time away from her and the kids, talk about struggling with being a husband and father, be away from her for 6 months after the birth of their son (by her own words), her basically at mummy’s most of the time, him off doing whatever he wants, be with Jecca instead of with the family for big events (first family vacation, first Easter).

        As Betti said, not even his family expected him to ever marry because he never wanted to. He married her family, not her, because of pressure. That cannot end well. Especially since he’s blowing the image Carole has crafted for so long.

  16. Prince says:

    I just can’t imagine Wills being king one day. He hates this job.

  17. anna222 says:

    Duchess Kate is “less than pleased” with his shenanigans about as much as I am “less than pleased” with the turd my dog did in my bedroom.

  18. Bridget says:

    This came up a bit yesterday, but it’s amazing how crappy that nightclub looks. That’s something I’ve always wondered about – the people that stay in the ultra exclusive destinations and frequent the ultra exclusive establishments are generally the rich, but there doesn’t tend to be a lot of crossover with “young and cool”.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      That night club looked super lame!

      I think it is an issue of it catering to an economic elite rather than a cultural elite. It is def not for the set of sophisticated taste-makers.

      • Bridget says:

        I just think it’s funny, because these guys are sold as jet setters, and of course Guy Pelly and his supposedly super cool nightclubs, but no one really thinks about the fact that it’s basically just another lame hotel nightclub. Can you imagine how uncool their house parties are?

    • Catesby says:

      No, these people aren’t cool. That isn’t how cool works. You want to find cool? Go to a neighborhood, in a big city, that’s just on the edge of gentrification. Its an interesting progression.
      Take a poor neighborhood, mix in art kids and club kids who are determined to refashion life on their own terms, taking warehouses and transforming them into lofts that will, in 5-10 years sell for millions and millions of dollars (see Soho, Williamsburg etc).
      Wills and his ilk purchase what others tell them is cool. They don’t create it, they may not even understand it, but they buy it all they same.
      No, these people aren’t cool. Its debatable whether or not one can buy cool. You can wear the cool clothes, put the cool artist on your wall, but…there’s a reason why the word ‘poser’ was invented. Just sayin’ ;-)

  19. TheOtherOne says:

    I hope Waity has her own private bank account because Wills would have to pay in cash. And this should be money she keeps secret for her mom and her useless brother.

  20. WendyNerd says:

    It’s not about the cheating. It’s about people knowing. Seriously, Will is so f-king dumb. I will say this for Kate —- In this case, she resisted the urge to be papped shopping this time. And seriously, Commonwealth Day? Sure, it’s not a big deal to the average person, but there’s a reason it’s so important to the queen and the BRF, especially in the wake of Brexit. Does Will not know that being Head of the Commonwealth ISN’T a rightful title of the sovereign? This isn’t something like the crown or one of the hereditary duchies— his grandmother is Head of the Commonwealth only by the will of the Commonwealth delegates. She’s held it due to her popularity, devotion, and because she’s shown such respect for the institution. And it’s become such a tentpole! Charles, if he wants that position (and I suspect that he very much does) will have to at least campaign a bit. But the commonwealth is such a huge source of validity for the queen and the RF! Skipping out on something like the Irish Guards was awful, yes, as was missing Christmas, but those titles aren’t going anywhere any time soon. But this position, which is only going to grow in importance for GB and the BRF… That’s dependent on the goodwill of others. And he skips it. I mean, if there’s anything that would make me start suspecting that Will is a closet republican plotting to bring down the monarchy, it’s this. The BRF HAS to care about Commonwealth Day!

    I’m not sure Normal Bill realizes that, though. And I’m sure Kate has been “less than pleased” with Will’s behavior for over a decade. That’s not going to make a difference at this point. This is just fluff to garner her sympathy. I almost laughed out loud at the idea that Kate “wears the pants in the relationship”. She doesn’t even wear the UNDERPANTS in this relationship!

    • ArtHistorian says:

      This is the guy who approaches the annual Diplomatic Reception as if it is a costume party and then brags about it on national television!

    • Kate says:

      WendyNerd, you hit the nail on the head. He just doesn’t get that both action and inaction have consequences. Unfortunately, he has yet to bear the burden of the consequences of his behavior and choices. I think that’s changing, though. We’ll see.

    • Bitchy says:

      She is working on wearing the pants and the underpants in the future. Kate or at least Carole do understand who William is: weak and whiney and impulsive and dull and stupid. William isn’t clever enough to pull off such stunts as skipping Commonwealth Day in favour of a party.

      Carole sees her chance to enable her daughter to be the ruler in that relationship.

  21. Mumbles says:

    I predict she will NEVER leave him. The social status is just too important. Diana grew up titled and posh, and even for her, walking away from being a potential Queen was difficult. Plus frankly Kate seems like a simpleton; Diana seemed to be a far more complicated person.

    I too am surprised how dumpy that nightclub looked. It looked like some dumpy rec room in a basement that someone out fancy lights in.

    I did snicker how the DM felt obligated to mention Guy Pelly. It’s always his fault.

  22. WendyNerd says:

    Okay, so here’s my big question about the potential “end” of the Monarchy in Britain:

    WTH happens to the peerage and House of Lords, then?

    The whole title thing doesn’t begin and end with the BRF. It’s not like Sweden. Half of Parliament is not made up of elected officials, but of Lords who are titled and appointed to lifelong offices by virtue of birth/title/privilege. Then you have the absurd amounts of money, property, politics tied directly to stuff like duchies, earldoms, etc.

    It’s why I’m not so sure getting rid of the RF would be as easy as some believe. When literally half of your legislative body is built on title, birth, and not election, how is it that abolishing the chief system of, well, title, birth, and not an election that the entire House is derived from 1) Can be gotten rid of so easily and 2) Not potentially destabilize and undermine the validity of such a major establishment of the active, constitutional government? Are there contingency measures/plans even drafted for such an occurrence.

    Like, to me, (a gauche American who, while a small-r republican who doesn’t believe in monarchy, is still fascinated by it) the House of Lords is like, a WAY bigger strike against principles of democracy and such than a constitutional monarchy on its own. I know, for instance, that Sweden has talked about getting rid of their monarchy once and for all and that the survival of the Bernadottes more or less rest on Victoria, Daniel, and Madeleine’s popularity, but the Swedish systems seems far preferable to me than what Britain has, considering the Riksdag doesn’t have any basis in the peerage left. I’d rather have a singular royal family with no nobility and the actual government made up solely of elected officials than the British system with the RF AND a still-existing aristocracy AND a House of Lords-type institution. And, while I know appointments to the HoL are made by the PM, technically, there’s a reason they’re not considered to be on the same level of the House of Commons and why their structure is title-based.

    Yeah, plenty of aristocratic families are impoverished and such, but enough of them are not. Enough of them have properties and fortunes directly tied to the system of aristocracy (see: The Percys). So how can you dismantle the ultimate title system, on the basis of equality, democracy, and dismantling class privilege, without dismantling 1) Basically half the constitutional legislature and 2) Such a huge power structure in the country that encapsulates so much money, land, power, and privilege? How can you keep dukes and baronesses around and valid—- let alone tie such powers to their membership in the legislature— when you’ve just gotten rid of kings and queens?

    I always assumed it was stuff like that which has been keeping the RF in place for so long anyways, even through all the upheavals and such. Yeah, the queen is personally popular, but it’s not like that fact isn’t probably helped a great deal by all the powerful people who would have an interest in preserving an institution like the monarchy in the first place.

    But seriously: imagining the scenario where Britain cries out “Enough! We’re done!” and ends the monarchy, what is done with the peerage and parliament?

    • ArtHistorian says:

      This is one of the reasons why it is highly unlikely that Britain will abolish the monarchy. It is too tightly woven into the fabric of government and there’s a huge part of the political establishment who have a vested interest in preserving it.

      I’m Danish and I’ve too find the House of Lords offensive. It is unusual to have a two-chambeer system in a country that isn’t republic made up of several states – like the US or Germany. Denmark had a two-chamber system as well – but it was abolished in 1953 (when Margrethe was made heir over the King’s brother). Furthermore, it is a relic of unjust system of unearned privilege that has no business in a modern democracy.

      Currently, the monarchy of Spain is the most unsecure – for two reasons: 1) the most immediate reason is the scandals that haunts several members of the Spanish RF and 2) it is a restored monarchy and those are always more insecure because the people remember a time without it. In France the monarchy was restored more than once in the 19th century but it didn’t survive.

      The Swedish monarchy isn’t that secure either. Mostly because the Swedish Parliament has proved, more than once, that it has no compunction in making significant changes to the institution against the monarch’s wishes. Furthermore, it is now a purely ceremonial institution, which makes it easier to abolish without changing foundational legislature. Add to that that the Bernadottes are a fairly new dynasty with NO historical connection to previous Swedish dynasties. That is actually important since they can’t act as the symbol of deep historical continuity that other royal dynasties have. Fx the current Danish royal dynasty, the Glücksborgs, is younger than the Bernadottes but through various cadet brances they have a historical connection to the very institution of the Danish monarch that goes back more than a 1000 years. It is the same with the current British dynasty. They descend from the House of Hannover that was elected as Kings of Britain because they were Protestant and had some drops of Stuart blood (the Stuarts had Tudor blood, the Tudors has Plantagenet blood, etc.).

      The Belgian monarchy may also be somewhat unsecure as they are a rather new dynasty as well. Belgium is a fairly new nation/state, created in 1830 and invested with a monarch that came from the House of Saxe-Coburg.

      Despite all of this, we have yet to see a monarchy be abolished by peaceful and democratic means. That doesn’t mean that it can’t happen. there’s a first for everything but historically speaking, fallen monarchies have always been the result of massive and violent upheavals – the French Revolution, WWI and WWII, the Spanish Civil War, etc.

      • Maria says:

        Well the Greeks had a coup and ousted the King. Why can’t the Brits do it? By the way, i am interested why does Constantine still refer to himself as King, and his son is Crown Prince?

      • dodgy says:

        I do like the House of Lords, tbh, because they tend to act as a buffer between whatever government is in the Parliament and the hairbrained schemes, tbh. They tried to act as a buffer for Brexit, but the MPs pretty much just rolled over and made it pass, so…

      • ArtHistorian says:


        Not really an equivalent situation to a democratically based abolishment.

        Actually it was a series of coups where one was led by the king and a faction of the military. He was deposed by a coup from another military faction that established a military dictatorship. That coup was never about what was best for the people.

        The fact that King Constantin supported a military dictatorship by another faction than the one that ousted him was not forgotten by the Greeks when the democracy was reinstated.

        Incidentally, the Greek monarchy was also a fairly new institution with a Danish prince being chose for king inthe 1830s after a Bawarian prince had failed as Greek king.

        I’m not opposed to a two-chamber system as such. What I don’t like is that some people inherit seats because they have an aristocratic title. I don’t like unelected people having power in government.

      • WendyNerd says:

        Precisely. Like, is there a European monarchy that has their aristocracy so ingrained in basically every government institution the way Britain does? France didn’t even technically have a proper parliament when they first went down. Legislative groups like the Riksdag have been divorced from any class system for so, so long. Like, if anything, the BRF is likely the least purely-ceremonial monarchy in Europe. And I guess that one of the reasons this hasn’t changed is because enough people assume that the BRF is about as secure as the Bernadottes. But, no. Like, they have far more backing/power/authority than most. People take the “purely figureheads/ceremonial” thing for granted and overestimate it where The Windsors are concerned. I mean there are reasons why things like the Cromwell regime didn’t last past a generation and why most British revolutions have mostly amounted to replacing one king/queen with another rather than doing away with the whole thing altogether. Usually when monarchies fall, they fall HARD from a place of “absolute power” with them being more or less the only class rank establishment to… severed heads. There’s not enough of an alternative power block that needs the traditions of a monarchy to keep them afloat. Of course, that doesn’t make the Windsors themselves invulnerable, like, at all. It’s the institution itself that would be hard to remove. The people themselves…. they’ve been replaced before and they can be again. Especially if their future is just a bunch of stupid shit like this. Enough people may want/need the monarch, but that doesn’t mean they need William to be the face of it. Too bad he seems to conflate his personal importance with the institution itself. It’s clear that he doesn’t realize that’s HE is disposable even if the monarchy isn’t.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Britain is, as far as I know, the only constitutional monarchy where as Coronation is performed on the accession on a new monarch, which IMO has no place in a democratic state even if it does have a monarchy. It absolutely reeks of absolutism and the divine rights of kings, which is doubly ironic since Britain is the only country that successfully avoided the absolutist monarchy in the 17th century.

      • graymatters says:

        Wasn’t there a King Simon…Simeon?… of something who ended it all and was then elected PM? From one of the little European countries that might no longer exist or does now but didn’t during the Soviet years? I have very vague memories of a nice looking man in a b&w photo, so within the last century.

    • LAK says:

      This question stumped Oliver Cromwell and his round head parliamentarians.

      They couldn’t figure it out, so invited monarchy back.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        As opposed to France, the British monarchy is the only one that managed to survive a restoration long term. There’s no set rule – everything comes down to historical circumstance.

        Didn’t Oliver Cromwell act as a kind of constitutional monarch in all but name?

      • nem says:

        i don’t think france is a good example as we have two chambers in parliament too.
        kings and emperors didn’t succeed in my country because of struggle between several royal and bourgeois factions, and compromissions from aristocratic elites with powers from abroad (germany,austria) during a 19th century of wars and poor and working classes political rising.
        so TPTB adopted a bourgeois republic which supported rich people interests so former elites could fit in.
        today the french equivalent of house of lords is the sénat.
        it s considered like a luxury retiring house for professional political old people with a lot of privilege and money and a lot of scandals.they are elected for 6 years by mayors,member of parliament…so big parties are sure to win and reward who they want.
        so i think it’s the same system with a different form and name so it looks more democratic.

    • bluhare says:

      I love you guys. Thank you WendyNerd!

    • LAK says:

      The house of Lords has undergone reform which may or may not partially answer the question as far as hereditary Lords who have a seat by virtue of birth, but doesn’t answer the question of unelected representation.

      Before 1999, the majority of the people sitting in the house of Lords were there because by virtue of birth. The 1999 reforms chucked most of them out leaving a total of 92 hereditary peers. The number left are elected by other hereditary peers as opposed to the pre- reform era whereby they inheriting their seat by virtue of their ancestors having the seat in the Lords.

      As the seats aren’t guaranteed anymore, and can only be acquired by a vote amongst their hereditaty peers, one could say that there is a tiny hope of election within an undemocratic system.

      That leaves 668 out of the 760 total members of the House who are appointed by the lower house and or government of the day. Ex-PMs and Cabinet ministers are automatically invited to join the Lords, most have taken up the invitation.

      Many MPs retire to the Lords. As the majority of the new members since 1999 are political appointees, there is a real danger of cronyism on an unprecedented scale. The hereditary peers are natural conservatives, but for the most part tend to be neutral about party politics ie they vote with their conscience more than the new members who tend to vote according to the party that gifted them the seat in the Lords.

      Recently, it’s been revealed that the house comprises more labour and Liberal Democrat appointed Lords than conservative appointed ones which is seen as a good thing in terms of last bastion of opposition to the Conservative government which is ruling virtually unopposed in the commons.

      All of this doesn’t answer the question WendyNerd has asked, but it is a tiny glimmer in a very complex situation surrounding the House of Lords and aristocracy.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        760 members of the House of Lords!!!!! That’s a lot of people.

      • wolfpup says:

        Thank you all for answers to questions I’ve had for years since posting on this site. IMO, the House of Lords has always been a big problem for me, yet sometimes I need to ignore a government which is not my own and consider the US constitution was based on ideas to mitigate such factors as church, state, and officials, in ensuring justice. However, The Donald Trump thing? – - I went to the hills, skies, and Stars, for this.

  23. Beth says:

    William and Kate used to be attractive people. She looks so old and he’s definitely not the handsome guy he used to be

  24. Paisley says:

    The dancing was okay; shouldn’t have touched the girl. I’m calling too much alcohol. This will blow over.

  25. Cerys says:

    I am sure she is “less than pleased” but I doubt it will make a difference. Whiny has had a lifetime of people pandering to his every whim and is not likely to change now. Kate has been a doormat since she started going out with him so again is unlikely to change.
    I can’t see her ever leaving him as she (and Carole) have fought too hard to get the title. The only way they will split up is if he decides to trade her in for a younger model in a few years time.

  26. HappyMom says:

    I can’t believe Carole encouraged her from the beginning to put up with all of his shenanigans. As the mom of a teenage daughter, I cannot imagine EVER saying “keep your eye on the prize.” If I heard that her boyfriend was anything but loyal and kind I would be encouraging her to break up with him. For all the kudos that Carole gets for her parenting-I think this is disgusting. What kind of person would be okay with their child being treated like this???

    • Alexandria says:

      Didn’t Kate change universities or she decided to defer her university entry so that she could take the same classes as William? Do correct me if I’m wrong. If so, that was quite freaky.

      Also what were people expecting? She’s likely mad at home, scolded William for not being discrete. William dumped his baggage (to the Butler) and walked away. Carole tried to call him or texted him. William showers and goes to sleep. Then goes to work at EAAA to ‘atone’.

    • nem says:

      she s the same that these dangerous stage parents who use their children for their own means.
      it must have been easy to bribe kate and pippa into it,with the good life, the so called easy job to be a waiting mattress instead studying harder for bank and financial work (the kind of job which give the quantity of money they love),as the reward was surer and more prestigious.
      the wisteria sisters have been brought up for being upper class spouses from the beginning of the 20th century who have to bear anything from allmighty aristocratic frat bros..a time when divorce was impossible for royals
      without uncle gary and their parents support they have nothing of their own like their failing brother.
      as a result,carole the social climber has seen greener pasture,but remains ostracised and despised for enabling her bratty son in law. it seems her genius plan didn’t foresee disaster for her daughters in potential separations with iron clad pre nups.
      if wills chasing skirts ways find better, he won’t look back.
      prince charles case proves wedding rings and offsprings aren’t a bulletproof way to queen for life coronation heaven anymore.
      the day kate is wanted out,she is trapped by her spending and living habits,more like a new fergie,as she doesn’t have any known network to back her.
      there is no way a smart and loving mother throws her dear child in such mess for her own desillusions of grandeur.but a calculating, ruthless and arrivist pseudo nouveau riche one would.

      • Bitchy says:

        Perhaps will and kate won’t divorce:
        William is weak and Carole manages to rule him. The Royal Family doesn’t seem to be able to restrict Carole’s ruling of William. Why would she allow Kate to divorce such a “perfect” husband? Other upper class spouses wouldn’t tolerate to be ruled by Carole like William.

      • nem says:

        i agree with you.
        william is weak but spoiled and stubborn.what he wants is his way.
        for now his selfishness is compatible with carole interests.
        but we all change,and wills too.him in bad way .
        maybe one day this won’t coincide with having kate at his side even for public occasions.(he already is unable to hide his unpleasure staying near her and their toddlers)
        if this time comes he will throw the unfamous middletons under the bus without any regret,like the windsor he really is.(it will be the tabloids delight as they are not liked)
        contrary to kate he has kept his friends (one is bachelor again…very worrying for his family) and will always find a shoulder to cry on.like his dad.
        she is convenient for the moment …in french we say les cimetierres sont plein de gens indispensables(cemetaries are full of irrepleacable people) for cases like this one.
        and once kate is discarded carole has no reason to keep benefiting from royal places services and others usurped privileges without hostile public scrutinity.
        working on her grandchildren will be hard if wills vetoed it.
        it seems pippa is gonna have the best deal of the three siblings: very rich but not aristocratic (who mocks her family and origins) private citizen spouse with less maternal intrusion but more respect than her brother girlfriend.

      • Bitchy says:

        @ nem

        Great analysis ;-)
        I really hope that William will be able to put his foot down. I don’t like him but I dislike the Middletons even more. Nobody is more disliked than a social climber with no merits to justify her position.

        I think that Will and Kate are building their own “court” aka the excavation at Kensington Palace. This might give Kate some more power, actually, because she will have her own people to defend her interests.

        Are Pippa and her family really mocked by her husband-to-be? I hadn’t heard anything about that.

    • LA Elle says:

      I’ve met women similar to Carol, although none even close to Carol’s league. But I don’t think her mindset is as unusual as I’d want it to be.

      One family friend advised her daughter that “it’s as easy to fall in love with a poor man as a rich man,” and that woman’s granddaughter was concerned about the size of her engagement as being “too small.” A friend who worked at an engagement ring store had more than one story about women telling their boyfriends that they would only accept a ring larger than x carats and, in one case, a woman rejected a guy for buying “only” a 2.5 carat diamond (despite it being close to flawless).

      My Mom served on a charitable board when I was a kid, and when I was older, she told me she was amazed at how many of the doctor’s wives knew and didn’t care that their husband were having affairs, as long as they had the big house and the prestige of being “Mrs. Dr. X.”

      • Bitchy says:

        @ LA Elle

        I know such types, too.
        The father of a school friend of mine is a doctor, too. He “found” his wife when she was waitressing and “exotic dancing” in a bar, as the school friend told us about her mother. [sic!] You would never have guessed the “career” of this “Mrs. Dr. X” if you would see her: perfectly coiffed hair, perfect fingernails and perfect caked on makeup. Clothing style more conservative and more boring than Laura Bush who btw. dresses fine (conservative but fine). She always drove through town in a car that had a plate in the window saying “doctor at work” and she made sure they bought a villa-style house in the “right” part of town.

        These types are VERY unhappy especially in later life when they think about all the things they didn’t achieve because they spent all their energy to get a MRS degree.
        Those who did go for a career and a loving relationship are usually more happy even if they don’t make it big. They know they have their real friends and their real relationships and their achievements are their own and they usually try to do something even in retirement because doing things / not wasting their time simply makes them happy.

        # Meaningful Life

  27. Apples says:

    Kate is the one “wearing the trousers” in the family? Hahahaha. Sure, okay

  28. HoustonGrl says:

    To be fair, this looked like the lamest party ever. That said, he WAS acting like a single man.

    • nem says:

      but he looked the happiest for long time…the further from the wife and kids the better for him.
      the fail has already put images from the welcome from our french (failure) president.
      the emphasize is on her (from far and with filters she seems lovely, coat and dress fit, earrings and necklace are great but hidden by the wiglets from hell),and wills grin is so fake and ill at ease,he should resign the heir position.

      • Penelope says:

        Just saw the Fail pics–Will’s suit looks too small on him. He cannot dress properly to save his life.

      • nem says:

        all his money and savile row tailors are wasted on him.
        he s like the embodiment of the definition of g.r.r martin GOT false spring.
        the golden beautiful teenage world number one heartthrob is long gone…

      • Princess says:

        Well William certainly looks smarter than Hollande, with his trousers around his ankles, Ithought the French led the way with style?

      • nem says:

        @princess touché!!!!lol
        it needs french translation in this topic
        president hollande is lucky to be from a generation when political men weren’t judged on their physical appearence, and looked better in his young days.(badly not teen william good)
        but he had to diet in 2011-2012 for the elections.once president he has gone back to his old eating habits.
        political women always have to be classy.
        the new statemen have to be sexier and some are yummy until they open their mouth( to hurl far right bullsh..)
        the french smart look is for women.well off and rich ones or those who are lucky enough to find ways to cheap good clothing and thin.
        studies have proved people which are not slim to obese avoid to come in Paris,fearing to be shamed and uneasy.it ‘s difficult to get plus sized wear which is not costly(when it exists) karl lagerfeld stays happy here for a reason.

  29. Caroline- Genevieve says:

    No doubt William has done this plenty of times before.

    And Kate puts up with it….as long as William is discreet and doesn’t humiliate her. But times like NOW…and when he was caught in Spain with Jecca are when she must be upset that he can’t at least make an effort to hide his cheating from the public.

  30. Joannie says:

    I just saw a pic of her in France wearing an ice blue dress. She looks absolutely beautiful.

  31. TheOtherOne says:

    Is she nuts and/or delusional? Carole with an E needs to stop. You go after his three closest friends (2 of them are godparents to the grandchildren), their finances, their spouses, and Chuck all in the same article. Girl, you in danger!


  32. fina says:

    A capricorn (she) meticulously masterminding everything so she can get what she wants, and a gemini (he) free spirit, explorative, independent. Excuse me but i don’t think they are a good match. She will stay the course no matter what, too much to lose after so much struggle to get it. He will probably go astray soon enough, he’s probably had enough of what others want for him.

  33. Anare says:

    I have a theory that Wills was super close to his Mom and to this day blames his Dad and Granny for all the awful things that happened to his Mum, including her death. He won’t listen to or respect a thing his dad and granny tell him. He seems unhappy and pinched looking all the time. I read somewhere that he is noted to be snappish and quick to anger and that makes sense. If you’re a royal watcher and connect the dots you’ve seen this behavior.

    What I don’t get is if he so hates how his mom was treated why is he behaving the same way with his wife? Maybe that is why he looks pinched and gets angry quickly. Self-loathing.

    This whole ski trip deal makes no sense to me. I suspect there is a juicy back story. It was done so blatantly that one has to wonder at whom was the message directed? Maybe he was spoken to by The Firm and told to get with the program or sit down as his brother is more than willing and able to step up. Wills threw a BF and stomped off to party with his pals, looking like a fool in the process. Meanwhile The Firm turns to Harry and says spotlight is on you boy, shine. And Harry shines.

    Let’s face it everyone loves Harry. He looks like a modern day King Arthur. He has the ability to bring people together. He just connects so naturally to everyone he meets. If they want to save the monarchy give it to Harry.

  34. Bitchy says:

    kate disapproving of William is bad in terms of the image of the Royal family. It is also not supporting the Royal family. I think Kate aims to rule William by putting him down now and then. Such intentions would explain an article like Nicholls’.
    Kate meticulously masterminded to get the Prince, as commentator # 32. fina brilliantly said. Now Kate will keep masterminding to be able to lord it over William.
    It shouldn’t be forgotten that William kept Kate dangling for a decade before marrying her. I sometimes wonder if she wants revenge for such a humilitating experience.

  35. Starlight says:

    There is a double page spread n the DM on Williams best mates the article entitled “The trio of tear away TOFFS nicknamed Badger Vans and GP leading Wills Astray” this title just says it all, but it seems like they have always been leading hm astray. The problem is he won’t give them up as mates and Kate obviously has to keep a watchful eye on Wills shanigans with this lot. A handful of toffs being a handful must be a big worry for her no wonder she chews her finger nails.

  36. Tess says:

    For some reason I feel that IF Kate cares she doesn’t care as much as Carole does, and she/they do it’s only because Will got caught/papped. I think his angle of news is Carole’s doing, I don’t know why I get that vibe. Maybe because Kate at least expected as much from the rumored “advice” she gave Chelsy about Harry that “it comes with the territory”.
    However it changes things when they get caught and are not discreet and I think there is a certain level of expectation from Kate and/or Carole that as an aristocrat he keep things very discreet while publicly maintaining a clean image.
    The problem here is that William is messy and not discreet. The easy solution is not to live a double life of course, but its almost like some royals feel a historical obligation to live double lives. Instead of going through the trouble of actually being low-key and discreet about affairs or bad habits and partying and doing things in a way that the press doesn’t find out, he only wants to silence the press and gag them when he does get caught, instead of say learning his lessons and hiding better.
    He would have reveled in the era on Henry the VIII where kings were almost deities and could do no wrong and he could just send to the tower whomsoever defied that perception of him.