Duchess Kate was keen in green (not black) Jenny Packham at the BAFTAs

EE British Academy Film Awards (BAFTAs) - Red Carpet

I would say that the overwhelming majority of female attendees at last night’s BAFTAs adhered to the Time’s Up “blackout,” meaning they wore all-black ensembles or mostly-black ensembles. Just like at the Golden Globes, there was a surprising amount of variety in black gowns and different looks being offered up, and just like at the Globes, it ended up being a surprisingly great social/political/feminist moment.

Ahead of the BAFTAs, there was a lot of royal hand-wringing about whether the Duchess of Cambridge would wear black, whether it was “against royal protocol” and whether Time’s Up was “political.” I said that it didn’t really matter either way, but I also said that Kate could have made the case for wearing black very easily: that “being against sexual harassment and abuse” is NOT a political stance; that Kate is keen on mental health issues and harassment and abuse are mental health issues; and that she’s broken the “never wear all black” rule many times before. Guess what? She didn’t wear black. Because of course she didn’t.

Kate ended up wearing this deep green Jenny Packham gown. Some British outlets claimed that Kate wore the black “sash” around the empire waist as a “nod” to Time’s Up. I bet it was just part of the dress though, but what do I know? I’ll say two nice things: one, this is actually a lovely dress and I always wish she would wear more shades of green; and two, if she was going to “defy” the red carpet blackout, I’m glad she didn’t wear something super-bright. This green is so dark, it actually blends in with all of the black. Think about how bad this could have been, you know? She could have worn white or hot pink or yellow.

Because Kate knew that we might be mad about her choice of dress, she gave us something sparkly to look at: emeralds and diamonds! This is actually a whole set called the “Cambridge emeralds,” and it includes the pendant necklace and emerald earrings she’s wearing, plus a brooch, I think. While these are called the Cambridge Emeralds, they are not Kate’s. They belong to the Queen, who must have loaned them to Kate.

EE British Academy Film Awards (BAFTAs) - Red Carpet

EE British Academy Film Awards (BAFTAs) - Red Carpet

EE BAFTA arrivals

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and WENN.

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

309 Responses to “Duchess Kate was keen in green (not black) Jenny Packham at the BAFTAs”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. All About Eve says:

    Kate might not be the world’s greatest feminist, however she has not appeared in movies of known predators such as Harvey Weinstein & Woody Allen nor did she give Roman Polanski a standing ovation, so this makes her ten times more credible than most of these hypocritical Hollywood actors. Hollywood does not have any credibility on this issue and the fact that they wore black is nothing but a PR stunt to try to redeem their shattered image. There are many ways to support women than simply jumping on Hollywood’s latest bandwagon which will be forgotten in a year’s time.

    • Brers says:

      Also, it’s amusing how Time’s Up is meant to be about supporting women, and far more column inches will be spent on whinging about her dress than calling out any hypocrisy from other attendees to this.

      Guess some people will never tire of attacking women whenever possible.

      • Millennial says:

        I’m iffy on Kate, but I agree. I think for a movement about supporting women, there’s a whole lot of bashing being written here.

        I really do think she was stuck between a rock and a hard place – and there’s really no winning, people would complain either way.

        For what it’s worth, Kate’s (limited) charity work does include many women’s issues.

      • Milla says:

        Agreed. She looked pretty and that is a beautiful dress. The color is dark yet she went with the protocol or whatever. While it’s cool to talk fashion, we cannot judge women based on clothes.

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Agree with you, Brers!

      • Natalie S says:

        TimesUp isn’t about mindlessly supporting anything a woman does. Kate didn’t have to support TimesUp but she chose to attend an event in an industry dealing with sexual harassment and assault. Kate will probably not have to deal with a sexually predatory boss or coworker because of the immense privilege she enjoys. Recognizing that, it is distasteful that she chose to remain noncommittal and silent, not necessarily to TimesUp but to the issue. The BAFTAs aren’t just an excuse for her to wear a nice dress and expensive jewels.

      • Lady D says:

        Agree Natalie S. It would have been a ridiculously easy for her to wear black. She wouldn’t even have to mention TimesUp.

      • Merritt says:

        @Natalie S

        But it also should not be about bashing the color of a dress while letting people who have engaged in sexual harassment or sexual assault off the hook. James Franco wearing a Times Up pin despite being accused shows why wearing black or a pin doesn’t matter.

      • Megan says:

        If Princess Anne attended, would she have worn black? Of course not. At present, Time’s Up is a PR campaign launched by CAA to cover up the fact that they acted as Harvey Weinstein’s pimp.

        If and when Time’s Up coalesces into a movement with discernible programmatic work, then it will be appropriate for Kate to wear black. The BRF should not jump on fads for the sake of a moment of popular opinion.

      • Natalie S says:

        I don’t think it should have ever gotten to the point where it mattered what Kate wore. Wth was their team thinking not getting ahead of this?

        I’ve repeatedly said she and William didn’t have to support TimesUp but the issue is still important. Whatever TimesUp may turn out to be, being against sexual harassment and assault is not a fad. There are other charities that need attention and support and weeks before the BAFTAs were on anyone’s mind, their team should have made it clear that William and Kate actively support these charities. Their statement on the sexual harassment and assault in the film industry should have been released weeks ago. It should never have gotten to this point.

        William, Kate and their team badly bungled this up. There will be more issues like this and I hope they learn from this.

        People will always carry water for the royals and it can be damaging what will be thrown under the bus to give them cover. Kate and William behaved irresponsibly. They ran to the press about her hair extensions within hours of a story being published but waited on this?

      • Merritt says:


        Or it would have opened up stories about Prince Andrew, which the Royal Family has been determined to keep buried.

      • Otaku Fairy says:

        @AllAboutEve: To be fair, lines were blurry about Weinstein for years. It wasn’t clear to everyone if he was a rapist, a John, or just a convenient tabloid sexism tool. So I definitely don’t see a woman’s having worked with Harvey Weinstein in the past as something that destroys her credibility in making a statement against rape culture now. Woody Allen is a different situation, because his actions have been openly exposed by a victim for years instead of just gossip. But at least people are deciding they won’t work with him anymore. Unless they actually made statements dismissing Dylan’s story (like several celebrities have), I don’t see any reason why an actress who’s worked with him in the past should still be branded a hypocrite for any statement she makes against sex crimes. And Roman Polanski is a convicted pedophile.

      • Megan says:

        @Natalie Kate and William have been working steadily since January to bring attention to other charities. Both have been covered pretty extensively by this site.

        The moment when it was appropriate for William to comment on sexual harassment and discrimination in film and television is at the event where he is representing the industry. That way his comment is relevant.

      • Natalie S says:

        @Megan. I’m genuinely asking, what are the charities that support people affected by sexual harassment and assault? Because that’s how they show their support without being forced to align with one movement. And yes it is important they clearly show their support. Otherwise we get arguments like it’s too political and it’s against royal protocol.

        And am I understanding you correctly that William could only release his statement supporting industry efforts against harassment and assault around the date of BAFTAs for it to be relevant?

      • Natalie S says:

        Who is going to blame Kate for the predatory behavior of other royals? No one blames Camilla for Andrew.

      • Megan says:

        @Natalie – No, you are not genuinely asking. Sexual harassment and sexual assault are not issues Kate and William have chosen to focus on. Their issue is mental health and it is their right to chose the issues that matter most to them.

        Clearly their choice of issue disappoints you, but it hardly warrants the moral judgement you have made about their unwillingness to embrace the issue that matters most to you.

      • Natalie S says:

        @Megan. I was genuinely asking because I don’t follow them as closely as I used to and thought maybe I missed something.

        If they choose to associate with the British film industry and attend the BAFTAs, then they need to tackle it as more than some fun events to meet celebrities and right now sexual assault and harassment is a major topic. They don’t have to do it under the umbrella of TimesUp but supporting more resources is always a positive step. Otherwise give the patronage to someone who cares if according to you it is a matter that is not most important to them.

        And there is absolutely a mental health component to this issue and it raises questions if they have chosen to sidestep it.

      • Megan says:

        @Natalie As president of BAFTA, William’s job is to support and bring awareness to British film and television as well as BAFTA’s many official charities. His track record of showing up to support the charities greatly exceeds his track record for showing up to parties and awards shows.

      • Imqrious2 says:

        Does ANYONE NOT SEE THE HYPOCRISY of harassing/verbally attacking a woman for not wearing a black dress symbolising a movement about stopping harassment of women????

      • Natalie S says:

        @Megan. it bothers me that the majority of criticism has fallen on Kate when this is William’s patronage. The statement in the program isn’t enough. I have to look at the engagements William has done regarding the British film industry and how many of them are basically premieres and more fun type of work, but regardless, right now, sexual harassment and sexual assault is a major problem in the industry and as patron, William should be doing more.

      • Nick2 says:

        @Otaku MANY woman who are now putting themselves out there as leading members of the #metoo movement have openly supported Polanski in the past and have yet to apologize or retract that support (see Streep)

      • Siiiigh says:

        Agree 100%. This movement infuriates me. It is militantly monitoring what women wear. WTF?! HOW is that progress?

      • katefromcanada says:

        exactly Brers. thanks for writing what I was hoping to convey. You just did it better :)

      • anne says:

        Thanks to the Duchess of Keen we are now not talking about sexual harassment. What is that saying, “If you can’t help then don’t hurt.”

    • Natalie S says:

      Because some people are hypocrites, it’s okay for Kate to be spineless?

      Actually, she isn’t. I bet Kate showed so much backbone skipping most of the Paralympics to get a tan or turning down the Irish Guards.

      Why were they at the BAFTAs? What was the point?

      • anika says:

        Prince William has been president of BAFTA since 2010 – it’s a tradition with a royal involvement in BAFTA.

      • Brers says:

        How is she spineless?
        She followed protocol, instead of being accused of desperately grabbing for attention by breaking it?
        She didn’t and couldn’t piggyback onto the film industry’s movement, instead of being accused of tying herself to something she has no association with for attention?

        If invite to imagine what would have been written if she’d worn all black, if she’d worn a pin, if she’d spoken out against sexual assault. People would say it’s not her place. And it isn’t.

      • Natalie S says:

        But what purpose does he show besides being a Hooray Henry occasionally showing up for parties and meet and greets with celebrities?

        Do their own people not get how they underline their own irrelevance?

      • Natalie S says:

        @Brers. What protocol? Camilla is able to do excellent work helping sexual assault victims so where are William and Kate’s thoughts and support? Doesn’t have to be TimesUp but they shouldn’t pretend to be oblivious or above the situation.

      • Becks says:

        Natalie’s point is that Kate breaks protocol when she wants to, so she’s not “spineless.” Here, she just didnt want to. And usually when she does break protocol its greeted with cries of “she’s so individual!” “rewriting the royal family!” “a new modern royal family!” So, let’s not act like she was powerless here and had no choice but to avoid black (She wore black last year, she has that black lace DVF she has worn quite a few times, the black McQueen from several years ago – so its not like we have never seen her in public in black.)

      • halliego says:

        spineless? she’s the future queen.

        she’s. the. future. queen.

        she can’t do everything you want her to.

      • Natalie S says:

        @halliego. Camilla is also the future Queen. And far more open to criticism than Kate.

        It didn’t have to be TimesUp or nothing. And all those people William and Kate employ probably gave them excellent advice on how to show support without aligning themselves with TimesUp. Sometimes the buck has to stop with those two instead of looking somewhere else.

        Edited: Also, William is not exempt from this. He had more of a responsibility to make a strong show of support in some way considering his official role.

      • Brers says:

        Camilla likely won’t be the Queen, in fact. Princess Consort was the decision and by all accounts is something she’s happy with, unless Chuck is pushing for something else.

      • Amelia says:

        @Hallie – no she isn’t. She will never be a monarch of any sort, she will be the Queen Consort. A subtle, but important difference.

      • Cee says:

        Brers – Camilla WILL BE QUEEN in all but name. She will be the first lady of the kingdom. She will be the highest in rank. Just like she is now the Princess of Wales in everything but in name. Her title changes nothing and I for one do not believe for one second she will be styled Princess Consort and not Queen. That was done to appease the people who can’t let go of Diana.

      • Natalie S says:

        @Brers, Is that a response to why Camilla can do this kind of work while Kate can’t make a statement or just about the official titles?

        If it’s just about the titles, I think Charles is going to push for Camilla to be officially considered Queen. Maybe not right away, but he’ll try at some point. I don’t think she cares but he does.

        Having the title of Queen has nothing to do with whether a woman can support a cause against sexual harassment and assault. And if people think it does, we should examine the root cause of those thoughts because it doesn’t make sense. Kate and William don’t have to support TimesUp but they should have made a clearer, firmer statement and supported charities focusing on resources for people affected.

      • Lorelai says:

        @Natalie: just wanted to say I think you hit the nail on the head with every single one of your comments. ITA with everything that you and NIC919 say.

        If she didn’t want to wear black, fine! That’s her prerogative. But then she needs to own that decision, and all of her fans blaming a nonexistent protocol is getting so tiresome.

        And it is hilarious to see some of the reaching people are doing to claim that the ribbon (which I’m sure was just part of the dress’s design) was her “nod” or the emeralds showed solidarity with suffragettes. Such a joke.

        At the end of the day, the woman is just a blank, vapid person.

      • Bridget says:

        You guys. Camilla will be Queen Consort. It doesn’t matter what they choose to call her – by definition, as the person married to the King, she will be Queen. In the same way that she’s Princess of Wales right now, even if she doesn’t use the title.

    • Basi says:

      Bravo! You’re so right.

      Besides she looked stunning. And even more gorgeous with weight on her bones!!!!

    • Nic919 says:

      Please name one way that Kate has supported women in her life. Her cause is mental health for children and she barely does that as it is. She barely gives speeches, she hasn’t donated any of her money and she never volunteered at a women’s shelter or anything remotely similar during her years pre engagement despite not being busy with work. Camilla at least has worked to helped survivors of sexual violence and FGM. Kate hasn’t. Wearing black was literally the least she could do and she couldn’t be bothered. Camilla will be queen before Kate so why all the excuses for Kate when Camilla already has the role she gets first and she does far more with it. Let’s not forget that Diana was not afraid to wear the AIDS ribbon back in the day, which again others tried to say was political.

      • Addie says:

        Thank God, the voice of intelligence.

        Kate has done f**k all for anyone but herself and, at most, her immediate family in all the years she has been in public view. I very much doubt she could care less about Time’s Up. I note that her Private Secretary did wear black. Kate’s dress did come with a black sash so she was not ‘secret signaling’ as some of her deluded fans wish so desperately to believe. I don’t understand why these people insist on making excuses for someone so useless.

        Camilla has demonstrated support for women and deserves respect for that. As you point out, she has done far more with her role than Kate has with hers, and Camilla is almost twice Kate’s age. Plus she needs to deal with Brit hatred and their refusal to let go of Diana, who did so much damage to so many people with no personal consequences.

      • magnoliarose says:

        This is why I like Camilla. She shows strength and commitment.

      • Enough Already says:

        The way Camilla showed support to that woman she crashed her car into, pinning her inside while she, herself fled on foot. To whom did she make her first call? Highgrove, not the paramedics or police. I do not like or trust Camilla.

      • A says:

        You know for a fact that Camilla would have worn black. Or something black-adjacent (lol) to demonstrate her support for the movement. She has put in the work necessary for her to understand what this movement is about, which is ultimately what makes the difference.

        I don’t think Kate knows, nor cares, much for any of these things except for the glitz and glamour of Hollywood. Like plenty of people have said, she’s not one for much depth, and this is no different. She gets points because the dress is gorgeous, and it’s dark enough that I mistook it for black, but it’s obvious she didn’t think much about these things at all and is just choosing to go with the flow.

    • Veronica says:

      Great point!! Lots and lots of hypocrites donning their black gowns.
      And the dark green is pretty dark, plus the black sash. I think she made a smart choice if she was told to NOT wear black. I bet Meghan wouldn’t have worn black either. These women are not allowed to break the rules. They are not allowed to speak out. The world’s most glamorous duct tape for their mouths.
      And those jewels!! I adore that emerald pendant!! I am such a sucker for bling!!

      • Lady D says:

        That’s just it. She wasn’t told what to wear. Nobody tells her what to wear. Nobody. She chose to ignore women in crisis with her dress choice, because it doesn’t affect her. A willfully blind choice for a dress. As for Meghan wearing black, I’ll take you up on that bet.

      • perplexed says:

        She didn’t ignore women in crisis. CAA (which started the Time’s Up in initiative) did.

      • Veronica says:

        Lady D, where is Meghan’s statement of support for this movement? She can put out a press release. Actually, this movement started WELL before Meghan got engaged to Harry, and she is part of this Hollywood world, and I don’t recall her putting out ONE statement about any of this…not one word. Not even in her Vogue article, in which she could have talked about this subject.

        I am not beating up on Meghan here. I am saying to be fair to Kate. These women are not allowed to make political statements, or dress as a political statement, or however they see this topic. Meghan would have been the logical one to talk about this long ago, but from her – crickets.

      • notasugarhere says:

        MM was not “part of Hollywood”, lived in Toronto much of the time, and had already quieted down the majority of her social media accounts by the time all of this hit. Which you well know.

        If Harry and MM had attended this, I suspect she would have worn black and he would have worn a pin. Seeing as he’s already openly stated in a PR video that he’s a feminist.

    • PPP says:

      I know that a lot of people concentrate on Rose McGowan’s tone, but she’s right that the fact that the CAA backs Time’s Up completely deprives it of credibility. As she pointed out, Alyssa Milano, who is married to a CAA agent, started this. It is a great PR move, and that is Time’s Up’s first action: to cover up the crimes of CAA. Until Time’s Up disentangles itself from CAA, it is just more of the same. This is the agency whose employees walked unwitting actresses into a rape den, and they have neither identified those employees nor cleaned house.

    • formerly known as Amy says:

      If the royals go to middle eastern countries, they cover their hair for respect. Why don’t the women of Hollywood deserve similar respect. Why come and not wear black and give ammunition to those who are trying to say fighting against sexual harassment is a political thing?

    • MrsBump says:

      Nathalie S
      Seriously this is getting beyond ridiculous. So progress is now dictating what other women wear? Is that what feminism is about now?

      So she chose not to, did that suddenly increase the number of harassment cases around the world today?
      Alternatively if she had worn black, what concrete difference would it had made?? Heck what difference is all these actresses wearing black making at all?! All this nonsense is just for show, emma watson donated 1M to the fund – that makes a difference, not the colour of your frock.
      What does it take for people to understand this? But sure, let’s all pile on another woman for her choice of outfit and proclaim ourselves great feminists.

      Btw, Frances McDormand, who is not only part of the acting industry but one of the nominees who eventually won, why isnt anyone having a go at her??

      • Natalie S says:

        Lainey made the point that Frances spoke about what she believed whether or not she wore black.

        I’ve made these points in my other comments: This never should have gotten to this point. William and Kate should have gotten ahead of this issue weeks ago instead of leaving it to the BAFTAs. They should have issued a statement and started supporting charities focusing on people affected by sexual harassment and assault. There is a mental health component so it fits with their current charity work and William especially because of his association with the British film industry should have done more. Not all of it can be dancing with Paddington Bear.

        I don’t actually care about what she wore. I care about the tepid response and I think they and their team deserve criticism for releasing a statement in the program and … is that it? And now we have arguments about how political and against royal protocol it is to take a stand on this issue? This was very badly handled.

      • MrsBump says:

        @nathalie S
        So, They should have piggy backed on the sexual harassment tidal wave just in time for the baftas? Had they done this, im sure people would then be calling them out for their hypocrisy.
        I think we women need to take a long hard look at ourselves when we draw the claws out so harshly against another woman. I understand Kate isn’t everyone cup of tea, we cannot identify with her, we may not approve of her work ethics, but it is not her job to right every wrong in the world, charity work no matter how laudable cannot and do not fix all the problems in society. Most of the time, only legislation can achieve this, and it is we the people who should demand this.
        As far as i know Emily Pankhurst was a regular woman, not an actress and certainly not a princess.

      • Natalie S says:

        Why would they be accused of piggybacking? William is associated with the British film industry which means it’s appropriate for him to be involved. People criticize them for not showing commitment to the work they do because until recently, they’ve had dismal work numbers. They would only be considered hypocrites if their work schedules didn’t back up their words.

        Don’t go to the BAFTAs if you don’t want to engage with the issues being discussed. It’s as simple as that. It’s not every issue in the world. It’s the issue in the industry they choose to associate with.

      • MrsBump says:

        Oh c’mon, so now they should have stayed home if they didn’t want to discuss it? Except that he did mention in his speech, but i suppose it wouldn’t have been enough for you since you not only wanted her to wear the black dress but also go on an anti sexual harassment campaign just to attend a fricking awards ceremony. Bloody hell, all Harvey Weinstein’s had to do was go to fake rehab!
        Seriously the vitriol being thrown at Kate is completely disproportionate, so she’s work shy, plenty of people, rich or poor are, it doesn’t make them villains. How about we keep the focus on things that really matter rather than being distracted by dresses of whatever color.

      • LAK says:

        MrsBump: speaking of princesses who supported the Suffragettes and or women’s issues…..perhaps you should read more about Princess Sophia Duleep Singh who was Queen Victoria’s goddaughter as well as Queen Victoria’s 3 daughters,Alice, Helena and Louise.

      • Cranberry says:

        “we women need to take a long hard look at ourselves when we draw the claws out so harshly against another woman” . . . .”the vitriol being thrown at Kate is completely disproportionate”

        Thank you @MrsBump

        You are a voice of balance and reason.

      • Natalie S says:

        @Mrs. Bump. Why are Kate and William at the BAFTAs? Being a senior royal is a job. There are responsibilities with the perks. The point of inviting them is to draw attention to important issues including those in the British film industry. Poor poodles that they couldn’t just have a night out?

        And William should be getting a lot more flack. I agree that is disproportionate to the focus on Kate’s.

    • perplexed says:

      I agree. She’s not a vocal person at all, but at the same time there’s nothing in her history to indicate that she loves Roman Polanski either. She was ambitious in her desire to marry the future King of England, but she didn’t praise predators to achieve that goal.

      Yeah, she’s a bit dull, but in the end I’d probably rather hang with her and Pippa than whatever strange nefarious community of people Kate Winslet, Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson and Meryl Streep love to praise. Having talent and being accomplished doesn’t necessarily mean you’re without some ethical cris-crossing problems.

    • bluhare` says:

      I get your point. I also think that it’s pretty hypocritical to play along with a system that abuses women and think that wearing a black dress means you’re refusing to deal with the system as it is. And these awards glorify that system. I get it. I agree with it too.

      HOWEVER, Kate went as her husband is patron of the organization. She wears black gowns and dresses to events. Yet the one event that it would have actually meant something to wear black, she didn’t. I don’t think the me too and times up movements are all about the entertainment industry. It’s about getting respect in the workplace, and if that’s a political issue, apparently I don’t understand politics. So how a woman can’t support that by wearing a black dress is beyond me. It’s even more beyond me that she and her husband were all about wearing headbands for Heads Together at the marathon — and also asked people to raise money by wearing said headbands — to start a conversation about mental health. How is that different than this? Mental health isn’t political either. It even affects people who’ve been harassed and abused in the workplace. But nada.

      So, yes, I think Kate should have worn black as she chose to attend the event. If that makes me a bully, I’m OK with that. If it makes me less than a feminist, I’ll argue you that until the cows come home. Equality doesn’t mean giving someone a pass who doesn’t deserve it.

  2. Brers says:

    Just because you don’t understand Royal Protocols doesn’t mean they don’t or shouldn’t exist.

    • Croatian says:

      Thank you, I second that. Who knows, maybe she had to fight for this amount of black, maybe this was too much for the Brits to begin with!
      And… Time’s up is an American based movement, which should be global, of course, but I am sure she had to obey the “We’re British, not American” argument, as well.

      • A says:

        There’s no such thing as the “We’re British, not American” argument, lmao. Wtf are you even talking about. The RF knows that this is a global movement, the idea that they’d be all prissy about it because it originated in Hollywood / America is absolutely ridiculous.

      • Rachael says:

        Um, this was a British film event with British actresses/actors wearing black. And young British women protesting on the red carpet, even! You’re making up a totally false argument that the Times Up is only an American thing – it’s not.

    • Natalie S says:

      What’s the royal protocol against making a statement on sexual harassment?

      They should have issued a statement about their support against sexual harassment in some meaningful way even if it wasn’t associated with TimesUp. They chose to bury their heads in the sand and treat this like a party.

      • Brers says:

        The male members of the British Royal Family have shown time and time again that forced and non-consensual sex are things aren’t exactly against; in fact, they have no issue participating in.

        Perhaps they are worried about some skeletons in the closet shaking loose.

      • Natalie S says:

        Camilla seems to do just fine.

        So, it isn’t royal protocol. She’s actually quietly protecting predatory members of the Windsor family?

      • LNG says:

        @Natalie S: Prince William did make a statement in the forward to the program:

        “Levelling the playing field and ensuring a safe, professional working environment for aspiring actors, filmmakers and craft practitioners – regardless of their background and circumstances – is vital to ensure film remains accessible and exciting for all.

        As president, I am proud of the leadership Bafta have shown on this; in a year which rocked the industry as many brave people spoke up about bullying, harassment and abuse despite the risk to their professional careers and reputations.”

      • Natalie S says:

        @LNG. So, maybe that ends the speculation that they were constrained by royal protocol.

        It’s not nothing but they should have done more. Their team did a bad job at not releasing this on their social media weeks ago instead of letting speculation build on what they would do and having supporters posit that this is a political issue or it is against royal protocol to say anything.

        Within their own charity work, they could have highlighted and supported mental health organizations who work with people affected and needs donations and resources. They could have done so well with this but it was badly handled and now the story is Kate in a green dress and a statement in the program.

      • perplexed says:

        I’m not holding the royals responsible for the crappy actions of people in the entertainment industry.

        There are other things to criticize the royals about, but the entertainment industry allowed Harvey Weinstein to wreak havoc. I hold that industry accountable for that behaviour, not Kate and William for not wearing certain colours at an event.

      • Natalie S says:

        @perplexed. Then they shouldn’t be at the BAFTA awards. They are associated, or William is and Kate choose to accompany him.

      • perplexed says:

        As far as I’m concerned they’re not associated with or responsible with whatever weirdness Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein, etc. are up to.

        They are at BAFTA to support art and creativity. But they are not responsible for the corrupt practices of the industry (William and Kare aren’t actually hiring any of these people to work on certain projects or singing their praises to earn an Oscar nomination, and he isn’t a CEO responsible for the procedures acting agencies put in their corporate manuals ), just as I am not responsible for whatever weirdness strange male directors and producers are up to just because I watch a film starring Gwyneth Paltrow in the cinema.

        Criticize William for hunting since he’s doing that with his bare hands, but from England I don’t expect him to know what some CAA agent is doing behind closed doors in LA.

      • Natalie S says:

        @perplexed. He is their president, not a spectator. He is associated with the fun and the less glamorous parts as well. He’s not at all responsible for what happened but he only gets to be there because he’s a prince and can draw attention and support. If he chooses to not do more than a statement in the program, then I’m criticizing him for that. Being a senior royal is a job, not just an endless series of perks like getting to go to the BAFTAs.

      • perplexed says:

        Yes, he can draw attention. I just don’t think in this particular case wearing a black dress or a pin makes any difference to bringing about actual systemic change. James Franco is wearing a pin, and I see how pointless that is considering his own bizarre history. Yeah, you’re wearing a pin? So? Now will you please stop trying to force women to do stuff for your pleasure? Some of us are simply noticing that wearing a pin or wearing a dress isn’t the action that’s doing anything to help change, and that is the specific action (or lack of it) that has been under scrutiny here.

        Some people feel wearing a black dress makes a difference. In my personal opinion, it doesn’t — not with this particular crowd anyway. I’d probably change my opinion if we were talking about heart surgeons or another profession entirely. But a large majority of people in the entertainment industry are not walking the walk while doing their talk.

      • Natalie S says:

        @perplexed. They weren’t limited to wearing a black dress or a pin -that was just among the least they could do to show support but they weren’t limited to doing that. William should have made a much stronger statement and shown a commitment in his actions. Kate should have also done something, otherwise don’t attend. If they want to avoid it, then really avoid it.

      • perplexed says:

        “William should have made a much stronger statement and shown a commitment in his actions.”

        I think he’s shown a certain degree of commitment by not being accused of sexual harassment or beating up his wife like other men attending this awards show have been.

        Has he given a long speech about the issue? No. Do I think he’s a brilliantly smart person? No. But he also hasn’t tried to actively stick in his foot in his mouth like Matt Damon and Liam Neeson either. There are so many disgusting people in the entertainment industry right now, it’s really hard for me to get worked up about William. When it comes to measuring men up against other men on this issue, the worst I can say about him is that he’s kind of lazy and spoiled. But at least he’s not totally disgusting like some of those other dudes are.

      • Natalie S says:

        “I think he’s shown a certain degree of commitment by not being accused of sexual harassment or beating up his wife like other men attending this awards show have been.”

        Nooooo. Come on, now.

        Whataboutism and low expectations won’t cut it. William is there in a professional capacity and has a ridiculous amount of influence and resources. He should do more.

      • perplexed says:

        “Whataboutism and low expectations won’t cut it. William is there in a professional capacity and has a ridiculous amount of influence and resources. He should do more”

        At present, low expectations is all I can set for the time frame from when this movement started. The Time’s Up initiative started only about a month and half ago during the Golden Globes. Awards season starts around January. It’s now mid-February. This became a hot button issue in late 2017 when the floodgates of accusations opened. Within the space of a month when the Time’s UP initiative initially started, I don’t expect William as a non-producer or non-director to turn the industry on its head. If this was 2 years from now, I could understand the criticism against him. But right now the expectations from me aren’t going to be extremely high when the men with systemic influence in the actual industry aren’t really doing much to help anyone out either. He can try and influence change within the next couple of years, but I’m not going to be unrealistic and expect him to swipe the industry clean of abuse and sexism within a month and a half.

        Directors and producers themselves (i.e Quentin Tarantino) haven’t done much to try to clean up their own industry. They are the ones directly working inside the system who could have made things better through the projects and associations they made, but didn’t. William and his team will probably have to do research outside of it to find people who are smarter and less ethically challenged on the issues to help them out. That, I feel, would take time. Going to people inside the industry probably isn’t going to help since most of them are shady.

        The Time’s Up initiative has set up a legal defence fund, but the agents who are within the system should have had preventative measures in place to not allow this kind of abuse to take place in the first place. My wrath is reserved for those enablers.

      • Natalie S says:

        No one is asking William to solve the issue but as President of BAFTA, more should be expected than a statement in the program. It was a bad move to even make their choices on the night of the BAFTA’s relevant to their position. It should have been explicitly stated where they stood and what action they had taken when the speculation about protocol first started.

        And William is already associated with these people. He’s already tied to it. You may have low expectations and commend him for not beating his wife, but the public will expect more if he and Kate choose to go to these events. In his own self-interest at least if he doesn’t care about anything else, he and Kate should say more and do more, or disassociate themselves.

      • ABC says:

        She should have worn black and he should have worn a pin. Show some support for goodness sake, it’s the least they can do (least being above nothing which is what they’ve done so far). As far as I’m concerned if she so much as steps outside her front door then I’m having to pay for her, this isn’t a ‘jolly night out’ it’s their JOB and they either do their job or quit and go live abroad somewhere. The most useless pair of spoilt, tone deaf children to ever be foisted on this country.

    • Annabelle Bronstein says:

      True, royal protocols are the only reason there is still a royal family at all. The minute the BRF become political or seen as activists, they would be de-funded within a generation.

      • Nic919 says:

        Diana wore the AIDS ribbon and that started in the US. There is no royal protocol preventing her from wearing black or being against sexual harassment and sexual assault. That’s not a political stance. It’s just more excuses for Kate, who has no problem wearing a black dress to this event last year. And for William to make a brief comment on the issue in the speech shows they could address it.

      • Merritt says:

        Diana didn’t start to break with protocol until her marriage had broken down.

      • Coz' says:

        Yes but I think we can all agree that the royal family does not want a new Diana.
        Kate has many many flaws but I find it unfair to compare her, or anyone (meaning Meghan), to Diana.
        Diana was an “anomaly” in the RF. She was never supposed to become this superstar, this phenomenon. And see how it worked out for her.
        There will never be a new Diana : because 1/ she was unique 2/ the RF will never allow it (no matter how much they evolved in the last 20 years )

      • Addie says:

        Coz _ I agree. But someone should tell Kate because she has been cosplaying Diana for years. Hopefully Meghan won’t be drawn into that. Though I wonder if ‘the boys’ insist on their women channeling their mother as some weird fetish.

      • SoulSPA says:

        And another reason why there is still a royal family is the fact that senior (some rank-wise, some age-wise) royals work. So there is a de facto protocol for work, image, coherence of speech. But not for the Dolittles and Harry the Innocent. So no meaningful work for the three snowflakes since their number of work hours is low. And all the rest …

      • magnoliarose says:

        Diana did break Royal protocol with her AIDS work and touching the person who was ill. She also changed the way charity work was perceived because she went from being a patron to being active. I don’t for one minute believe she would not have worn black.
        Wearing black is not against royal protocol. People have explained this over and over. Either the same person is stubbornly answering under different names or some rallying cry was heard in Sugarland.

        It is fine she CHOSE not wear black, but it is not protocol. She wore all black before, and this isn’t activism or political. Being against assault isn’t controversial. This was her choice and her decision.

      • Annabelle Bronstein says:

        @magnoliarose I agree that there was room here for an adept and aware royal to be supportive of this obviously very worthy cause without breaking protocol. But-as I said in another thread- I don’t think Kate would be a good spokesperson for Time’s Up in the first place. Her only real passion seems to be for kids. Kate wore a darker dress, if she’d shown up in hot pink it’d be different. She made a choice, but it wasn’t a statement.

        @SoulSPA that is true. I personally believe that Will and Harry have gotten away with so much due to public sympathy for Diana. But that is drying up now that they are grown men starting families of their own. They need to step up or they’ll soon get their wish to be ‘normal.’

      • magnoliarose says:


        I am ok that she chose a dark green dress and a black sash. She is not an activist, and she plays everything extremely safe. I think a statement would have been better PR, but they aren’t especially good at that. The dress was lovely.

        I will say this a million times. I blame William for most of the missteps. He could have made a statement before and shown up to the party the night before, and she could have worn black then perhaps. If SHE wanted to. He makes it impossible for her to win in some situations.

    • Lorelai says:

      We understand them just fine. There IS NO PROTOCOL that would have prevented her from wearing black yesterday.

      Being against sexual harassment and assault is not a “political” view, it is a basic human rights issue.

      I have no idea why so many people here are trying to argue that she couldn’t have done this one symbolic thing. There is no party that supports sexual violence that she would have offended!

    • notasugarhere says:

      She has repeatedly broken royal protocol and worn all-black before. Black velvet dress mimicking Diana. Multiple ugly Temperly black cocktail dresses. Multiple ugly black lace dresses. Head-to-toe black visiting kids in hospice.

      When it matters to wear black, she wears green (black ribbon was standard on the design, not her addition). Insult to injury, the green she choose clashes with the emeralds.

    • A says:

      She wore black last year though. Folks can argue that the dress was a print, but it was overwhelmingly black. She’s worn black on numerous occasions that I can remember for her evening gowns. She’s worn plenty of dark colours too. The idea that she knows, let alone cares, about protocol when it comes to clothes is laughable given the number of times she’s just not given an eff about it.

      She chose to not wear black. If she’d swapped this year’s gown with last year’s, it would have been perfectly acceptable. She knew the MO of the awards and just chose to not follow it. You can attach any particular interpretation to that, as you wish, but that’s the facts of the matter right here.

  3. LilLil says:

    I love the whole look, but it would be even better without the gigantic necklace .

  4. Annabelle Bronstein says:

    You’re right, the dress was so dark I thought it was black. I think Kate looked perfectly appropriate, and I don’t think she’d be a good ambassador for #TimesUp in the first place.

  5. Cally says:

    Has she started on injections into her face? She doesn’t look “right”?

  6. Carol Hill says:

    I don’t think those are the Cambridge emeralds, unless they have been reset into a new necklace.

  7. Digital Unicorn says:

    Of course she wore something that would make her stand out and I call BS on the black ribbon as a ‘nod’ to the movement, its just PR spin to make this twit look good after she got called out last night (the Fail had a spectacular snark about how she snubbed the movement).

    I also call BS on the ‘as a royal she can’t get involved in political statements’ – this is NOT just a political statement. It is MORE than a political movement, its also about changing/educating society as a whole that sexual harassment is NOT ACCEPTABLE in any way, shape or form. The way the British press are spinning this into some sort of luvvie stunting is making my blood boil – all because they don’t want to upset a special royal snowflake. This affects EVERYONE, men and women from all walks of life and we need to keep fighting against the media (mostly controlled by men who are guilty of this behaviour) who are trying to make this go away by undermining what it is actually about and what its trying to achieve.

    If they can support mental health, which is a massive political issue, then of course they can get behind this. She. Just. Does. Not. Want. To. I would rather we became a republic before these 2 useless morons take the throne.

    I feel very strongly that this is a cause that deserves more respect and attention that its currently getting – having her get involved would give it a massive boost.

    • sunnydeereynolds says:

      I thought it was a missed opportunity for her too. She has previously worn black before but with prints. She could’ve done the same thing here. More black than that sash on her dress and maybe a different color on the other parts of the dress? Or mixed with prints? It would’ve been a a good silent statement that says she can’t have a public opinion about this but she’ll show a support subtly. She looks good here though. The pregnancy weight on her face suits her.

      My thing is, if BAFTAs this year was too policital for them, they could’ve just skipped it this year. It’s not like they’ve never skipped it before? And William being the president of BAFTA, does he even a say about this Time’s up movement being done at his award show?

    • Cee says:

      Kate is lukewarm. I don’t actually believe she cares about mental health. The only time she actually looks engaged is at sport events. Instead of focusing on those, like for example Michelle Obama did, they gave her the “mental health” banner to make her look more substantial. She couldn’t be the Children’s or the Ill’s Princess like Diana was, so she had to be branded differently.

      If she cared she would actually do more. She would embrace movements like Time’s Up considering the correlation between sexual assault, rape, harassment, etc with MENTAL HEALTH.

      • DiligentDiva says:

        THIS, Kate simply doesn’t care. It’s obvious. She wants all the benefits of living off the British tax payer but doesn’t want any of the work. And lets face it, it’s not like the BRF do backbreaking labor. It’s not that hard to show up at events and look happy to be there.
        I don’t know how the monarchy is going to survive these two.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate has done little to show she cares about much beyond herself. She spent years doing not much of anything while waiting for Will to decide. She had plenty of time to volunteer and work on charitable boards since she didn’t need to work and she chose to go on vacation. And even now when she is required to do charitable work because it is part of the BRF expectations, she still does very little and it remains very shallow. Seven years later and she barely cracks 100 times in year of doing something that isn’t shopping. (And even within those numbers that includes concerts and movie premieres).

      • Lorelai says:

        Thank you! She doesn’t truly care about anything except herself and her immediate family; she’s shown us that for years and years now. Her boredom is so evident at any of her engagements relating to her mental health charities. For her, they’re just an excuse to buy new clothes.

      • Honey says:

        This was my criticism in the early years. From what we know publicly about Kate, she very few interests outside of William, shopping, photography (I guess), and her family’ to pull from. She looks bored and events and asks unintelligent questions (dumb a$$ questions) when given the chance. However, she seems to not only like sports but to be a natural at them. From appearances, she seems to have that diet and exercise thing down tight. So . . . why not slot her in for stuff around those things? Her PR people wouldn’t have to work so hard—if nothing else.

      • Cee says:

        She has the potential to be very good at sporting events/angles. Sports and an active lifestyle have enormous benefits. She could even link her sporting events with mental health. The fact that her team and her are missing thins point is very telling.

      • Enough Already says:

        Kate is vapid and unmotivated. I refuse to call her useless as some do because being a good parent is not inconsequential nor is it a marginal accomplishment. But yeah, otherwise nothing to see here folks.

      • magnoliarose says:

        It just isn’t who she is. They need to stop marketing her that way because she fails miserably at it and it highlights what she lacks.
        Put her in her lane and go with that. Any smart handler would do that.
        She isn’t deep, and she isn’t passionate.

    • Veronica says:

      So interesting!! Meghan was in Hollywood for over a decade. Where is her statement about sexual harassment? /crickets

      My point is none of these women are allowed to be political or make political statements. The heroine of the British Royal Family, Meghan, will be just as nonpolitical as Kate as long as she is with Harry.

      • Lady D says:

        TimesUp is not a political movement. It’s a movement to finally protect women from predators who think the female body is their personal playtoy. It’s not driven by or affiliated with any political party, American or British. It’s a movement that will help women be recognized for their worth. Not political, nothing to do with politics. Even if it was political, you’d think it would mean enough to her that she would say something anyway. What are they going to do? Boot her from the royal family? If Prince Philip can get away with the racist crap he says, she could have very easily said something about TimesUp, and she would have become a heroine to so many. It would have been ridiculously easy brownie points for her, but she just doesn’t care.

      • anne says:

        @ Veronica, Meghan gave a speech to the UN about equality even before the times up movement.

      • Veronica says:

        Anne, I know that. But she was forced to give up her UN Ambassadorship, and has said nothing about any of this since dating Harry, showing my point that they are not allowed to be vocal about most issues.

      • Merritt says:

        Meghan also had to give up World Vision, which is probably a good thing, since the organization is being accused of sexual exploitation.

  8. Becks says:

    I don’t think those are the cambridge emeralds. If you directly compare the two necklaces, the layout of the jewelry is different. I believe the blogger behind HMJV has said that she thinks they were a wedding gift to Kate.

    As for not wearing black – I didnt really expect her to, but I’m disappointed. If she wasnt going to wear black, this green is a good option. I’m not buying into the whole “the black belt was a nod to the movement” or “the emeralds are a sign of solidarity.” I actually like this dress generally but she has another JP from her last pregnancy that is almost identical. Even if she couldnt rewear that one at this point in her pregnancy, couldnt she have gone for something a little different?

    I follow a pretty pro-Kate website as well as this one and interestingly enough, many comments are that she should have worn black and people are disappointed (followed by “she has to make so many difficult choices!”) Posters over there are also saying that her face looks “different” and why on earth could that be?? LOL

    I think her hair looks great here but wish she had pulled it back to show off those jewels.

  9. Kate says:

    I would be done with this royal shit after that, if I wasn’t already done with this royal shit. Firstly, standing up against sexual harassment is hardy political statement. Secondly, member’s of royal family have no problem with braking the rules or protocol, as long as it suits THEM.

  10. Mrs. G says:

    To be honest how is wearing black helping the movement ? Just my opinion maybe stop working with the Woody Allens and Harvey Weinsteins of Hollywood.

    • Brers says:

      Policing what women wear to fancy galas is indeed a funny way to stop sexual harassment.

    • Becks says:

      Yeah, I think it’s something silly that Hollywood came up with to make themselves feel better about harboring people like Weinstein and Woody Allen for years. Its a very passive form of activism – I hesitate to even call it activism, because honestly, most of these women looked amazing in their black dresses (Speaking for the GG, I havent seen many of the BAFTA fashions yet.)

      But, many of these things are “silly” and people still go along with them. I dont think by not wearing black Kate was saying she is A-OK with sexual harassment, I’m just not buying the idea that she had “no choice” and “couldnt wear black.”

    • Nicole says:

      Yea I had an issue with the whole dress code thing at the globes. And some of these women have husbands in CAA, or applauded Polanski and signed a petition for him or just worked with Allen or Weinstein.
      Again the dresses do nothing if you won’t do the hard work afterwards. At this point it’s lip service to look good. I’m not going to shame anyone for not wearing black at this point.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Virtue signalling that only makes the one doing it feel good and like an “activist”

    • Beth says:

      The fact that the women are all wearing black isn’t even noticeable, because that’s always been the most basic and common color of dresses and clothing. A color for the #Times Up movement should have been an uncommon dress color like bright yellow or ugly orange. Wearing a color that doesn’t look good on everyone would more of a noticeable statement than wearing bland black,which looks good on everyone

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      I’m all for people wearing black in support of Times Up; Hopefully the movement doesn’t get dumbed down to “Any woman who doesn’t wear black doesn’t care about rape victims and sex crimes because those things don’t effect her! Selfish bitches!”
      But it’s the idea that Kate’s wearing black as a statement against sexual abuse and harassment would have been ‘too political’ or divisive that’s irritating. It’s very telling that some possibly having a problem with her wearing black would even be a thing to worry about, isn’t it?

    • magnoliarose says:

      It is black. An easy color to wear for evening.
      If it was a pink and yellow stripped catsuit, I could see your point. It would be going outside of someone’s natural taste. But black is easy.
      She chose not to. Why all the excuse making and dragging supposed reasons into it.
      She just decided she wouldn’t.
      This constant need to infantilize her is bizarre. Whenever she makes a choice some don’t like there always has to be a reason, and it must be someone else’s fault.

  11. OriginalLala says:

    I still don’t see how standing against sexual violence and harassment is a political issue – it’s nice to know basic human rights like living free from sexual violence aren’t seen as fundamental by some people.
    Kensington Palace posted a photo of the two of them at the BAFTAs on their Insta page and I swear they played with the colour of her dress to make it seem completely black

  12. Talie says:

    I think it’s disappointing because I do think Camilla or Meghan would’ve done black…I don’t get why this became such a thing. Taking a stand against the abuse of women by doing something very easy and non-threatening like this feels like such an obvious PR slam-dunk. Her advisors failed her…or maybe she failed herself.

    • Veronica says:

      Where are the statements of support of the Time’s Up movement from Camilla and Meghan?? Both could have tweeted out statements of support. But they don’t.
      First, because they can’t. They can’t make statements about this?? If Kate is expected to make a statement with her dress, then Camilla and Meghan should make statements as well.
      But none of them can. The price of being royal.

      • Nic919 says:

        Camilla heads up charities that help survivors of sexual violence and domestic assault. She has brought attention to this issue. Meghan has attended the UN and raised awareness about the obstacles women in developing countries face regarding menstruation. They have already contributed to helping women in some way. Kate has done nothing of the sort in her 36 years of life.

      • Olenna says:

        Why would Camilla or Meghan “tweet” about this movement? Do they have their own personal accounts or are they responsible for representing the monarchy in this movement? Why would the monarchy take up this movement as one of it’s causes? Camilla, in particular, is not a private citizen who can take up her own agenda. Why are you trying to so hard to make Meghan a part of this issue when this is clearly about Katie Keen who attended the event and is representing the monarchy, not Meghan or Camilla? It’s obvious you don’t like MM, but geez. She doesn’t need to be criticized or made an object lesson on every royal thread.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Camilla and Meghan have shown their support for women and women’s causes through their work. The idea that they would create twitter accounts and start tweeting out support for Time’s Up is just a desperate attempt to deflect deflect deflect. As per usual.

      • Eve V says:

        You keep making this point that Meghan should’ve tweeted or issued a statement. Yet nobody is asking or complaining that Kate didn’t issue a statement while at the BAFTAs. Some of us are disappointed that she wouldn’t wear black as a sign of solidarity and a show of standing against sexual harassment/assault. Your comparison is apples and oranges, frankly.
        Also, for the people complaining about women wearing black at these functions- nobody is claiming that wearing black is going to change anything. It is a form of protest and a way for women in the film industry to show solidarity with one another. Are there still some missteps and hypocrisy? Of course! Things are not going to do a 180 overnight. There has been systematic corruption in the film industry for decades and it’s going to take time and hard work to really change things. But just because women are calling on their peers to wear black at a film industry function does not mean they are not also doing the hard work behind the scenes.

      • Lorelai says:

        @Veronica: tweeting? WTH are you talking about?

        If Camilla or Meghan had been attending last night’s event just like Kate did, those of us who are disappointed that Kate didn’t wear black would be just as disappointed in them if they hadn’t either.

        No one is suggesting that Kate tweet — or even make any kind of statement other than wearing black to ONE event! — but nice try moving the goalposts of this discussion.

      • Veronica says:

        I was being snarky about the tweeting!! You know, kidding??
        You all think Meghan would have jumped on this, worn black, spoken out, but since she started dating Harry, has she made one comment about any social issues?? Nope. She has closed down all her sites and given up every one of her charities.
        I am not blaming Meghan for this – I am saying this is what the royal family wants from its female members. To look pretty and not make any waves. They do NOT want another Diana, especially from the American wife of the 6th in line. Meghan will be toeing the line and keeping quiet. Just like Kate does.
        Golden duct tape.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She shut down her social media accounts because she was transitioning to a new life, leaving behind the personal social media accounts was part of that. She’s already shown in her previous work that she supports womens causes, so I expect to see that out of her in the future. Your incessant posts about her not tweeting about this don’t read as jokes.

        Camilla advocates against domestic violence. She puts together cleansing kits for rape victims. Maxima advocates for better health care for post-surgery transexuals. Kate Middleton could have worn black, William could have worn a pin. The fact that they chose not to do these things in now *more* political (or tone deaf) than if they had done so.

      • Olenna says:

        @Veronica, you are all over the place with your point-making (being fair to Kate, royal women can’t speak out, MM should’ve done this/why did MM do that), and I suspect you are being deliberating obtuse in order to inject MM into this conversation. This wouldn’t be the first time and that’s why I usually hit the ignore button when I see it. But, you carry on; I guess it entertains you.

  13. MissM says:

    “The black sash and accessories can be seen as a nod to the movement” because of course. This woman’s entire existence is a nod, never fully committing to anything.
    I’m amazed the hoops that people have been jumping through to defend Kate’s choice last night. She isn’t the royal patron so she didn’t have to be there, she wanted to be. So she should have played along. Even if you don’t see a problem with her not wearing black you have to agree that the optics are terrible.

  14. Dttimes2 says:

    All i got is that i thought she was Caitlin Jenner in the first pic..

  15. ThenThereIsThat says:

    I think her dress is lovely.

    This “Time’s Up” is a joke. Hollywood actors and actresses knew about these predators and THEY DID NOTHING.

    Now they are being called out and they walk around in a black outfit and that makes everything all right?


  16. Scal says:

    What charity work she does do supports women and children-and somehow not wearing the ‘right’ dress cancels all that out. Yea no. The movement should be about actions-not shame policing what someone wears. Like others have said-Gary Oldham and James Franco wore pins.
    She wore something somber and dark-I thought it was appropriate given her limitations. It’s not like she wore a hot pink coat again.

  17. Starlight says:

    Sparkle probably would have done black her political and strong views on issues don’t seem to have been smothered yet by royal protocol or she isn’t going to be ruled by protocol. Fasten your seatbelts with that one. BAFTAs, but your wearing completely all black Kate, can you imagine, raised eyebrows. The emeralds very appropriate with the gorgeous dress and she looks blooming.

  18. Cee says:

    Standing against sexual harassment is no longer a political movement, it is a necessity based on equality and decency. The fact she chose not to wear black speaks volumes, and that sash is in no way a nod towards the movement. Poor Jason needs to stop spinning BS and instead be silent, sometimes that’s more useful.

    Considering how keen she is on mental health issues I would assume she could be interested in aligning herself with a movement that seeks to defend victims of abuse and stop abusers, in which cases the consequences of their actions put a strain on the mental health of victims.

    And before anyone shouts protocol at me, take a look at what Camilla, the HEIR’S wife and future Consort, does for sexual assault victims. Ironically enough Camilla is more like Diana than Kate and William will ever be. And William did try, and failed, to brand Kate as the next Diana.

    Also, Kate has worn black on numerous ocassions having nothing to do with Remembrance Days and funerals. She. Chose. Not. To. Wear. Black. If she can flash her underwear and as$ in public she definitely knows how to work around rules whenever she wants to.

    I thought she was doing better but like always it’s one step ahead, 3 steps behind. Thankfully for her she will soon get on her leave from doing nothing, have her third child and maybe perform her next engagement 6 months after Baby Cambridge 3 is born.

  19. Scram says:

    The jewels don’t go with the dress.

    Saying no to sexual harassment is not political. Just like saying no to rape or DV is not political.

    The blackout is a symbolic gesture. If it was the only thing being done I’d question it too, but it’s not. And to act like this is a problem specific to Hollywood… come on! We’ve read comments from older generations in the industry around Europe and know that’s not true, it’s just viewed differently by some. The rest of us live in the real world and see, hear, or experience stuff like this at some point. It’s not a bad thing to see people take a stand on any level. At the very least it can start a conversation. No, it’s not a perfect movement, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing. Some comments seem so “edgy” and dense.

    Last, participation is a choice, so I’m not going to be judgemental about it.

  20. DiligentDiva says:

    Kate breaks royal protocol all the time, clearly that doesn’t hold her back. She simply didn’t want to wear black to support the movement. Now I’m the first to say that wearing black isn’t gonna change anything, but what does it say of the future Queen of the UK when she refuses to do something like this?
    It’s not shaming Kate, it’s pointing out yet again how unprepared she is going to be for her job as Queen. She and William repeatedly prove how much they don’t want these jobs. Honestly I’m so sick of people defending her. She’s and her husband are bound to be the worst monarchs the UK has had in a long time.

  21. littlemissnaughty says:

    Personally, I think the BRF just won’t be roped into anything. If they support a cause or a movement or send a message, it won’t be because a group of actors and actresses asks them to. Or puts a dress code on them. THEY give out dress codes. That’s not how they roll, is it? The future queen doesn’t join and she doesn’t put someone else’s dresscode above protocol or above whatever she had planned to wear. Unless it’s black for mourning. I can see why. Once you start, you have no excuse to not do it next time and then you look like you pick and choose. It would be exhausting and she’s be opening herself up to even more criticism.

    This wasn’t a stupid choice. We might not like it but she probably had better reasons than “I want to stand out.”

    Having said that … god, the entire look puts her in the 1970s. Pregnancy really suits her but the styling … yikes.

    ETA: By the way. There is no way Kate didn’t wear black because it’d be political. Camilla has been raising awareness on rape and sexual abuse for years. Might’ve been an idea to get her involved. If that would’ve been an option.

    • DiligentDiva says:

      Completely disagree, the BRF supports plenty of causes, Charles supports plenty of causes, Harry supports plenty of causes. The only type of causes they can’t support is political causes, and the Times Up movement isn’t political.
      Saying the end of sexual assault in the work place is a political message that no royal can support I think is a rather awful statement.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        That’s not what I wrote at all but okay.

      • perplexed says:

        They support causes, but I also think their teams research a great deal before they decide to attach their names to it. I think an approval process has to go through before they decide to support it.

        And I agree with the original poster that they can’t have actors and actresses dictating to them what they should do. Also anytime actors and actresses are involved with something, something shady usually comes out so maybe the royals are being cautious in. avoiding scandal. The movement may not be political, but long-term we still don’t know what kind of weirdness is going to happen with one of the organizations (CAA?) attached to it, so it’ll probably be safer to go to Camilla and ask her what other groups might be better to support.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        @perplexed: Exactly. They’re not spontaneous and in this case, they shouldn’t be. I’m all for criticising their work ethic etc. but it’s smart to not attach themselves to something they can’t vet top to bottom. One can argue that she could’ve worn black and simply made a statement in support of victims. But we all know that is NEVER how it goes.

      • Lorelai says:

        @Perplexed: I think you actually make a very good point because CAA is VERY sketchy and has a lot to hide. I will not be at all surprised if they start getting hit with lawsuits.

        However, even if there is some Times Up-related scandal in the future, no one would look back and criticize Kate (or any of the other actresses) for wearing black for god’s sake.

      • perplexed says:

        But is the black dress in support of Time’s Up or in support of women in general? Honestly, this has not been made clear to me in the media.

        If the black dress is supposed to help women as a general rule or even just to show solidarity with them, then honestly I don’t get the point. How is a black dress supposed to change anything? James Franco wears a pin supporting “women” but he harasses women. Kate doesn’t wear a black dress, but she hasn’t harassed anyone, male or female. I don’t see what the black dress is actually supposed to accomplish. As far as I can tell, she hasn’t hurt anyone. I don’t think I need Kate (who has no strange history of behaviour behind her) to wear a black dress for me to understand that she most likely opposes the rape and assault of women. On the other hand, James Franco wears a pin trying to show solidarity with women, but we all know he has skeletons in his closet he’s trying to hide. All this proves is that it doesn’t really make a difference whether she wore a black dress or not since there are dudes out there pretending to be in solidarity with women while in secret violating them, hitting them (i.e Gary Oldman), or whatever else.

        So, while it’s possible Kate and the other actresses won’t be criticized for wearing black if a scandal comes out in the future, I also don’t see why she should be criticized for not wearing black right now, as I’m more than willing to believe she isn’t off creeping somewhere during whatever the heck it is James Franco is doing or a CAA enabler is. In some cases, actions are stronger than words. And as far as I know Kate isn’t some creepy predator or a creepy predator enabler, so I’m not going to heap my wrath on her for codes of behaviour others have miserably failed to honourably live by. Aziz Ansari called himself a feminist… then we read about what he did on his date. Realizing the hypocrisy of all of this, I don’t think Kate wearing a black dress makes a difference. It’s what people are doing behind closed doors that counts, and last I read she wasn’t one of those CAA agents leading Gwyneth Paltrow to Harvey Weinstein’s hotel room. Had we never found out about Weinstein, he’d probably be one of those hypocrites himself wearing a pin at BAFTA (all the while doing nasty stuff behind closed doors).

    • Ollie says:

      That whole thing yesterday sadly went into politicial territory. They made it clear this bafta time’s up is also about pressuring politicians into equal pay etc etc.
      There were activists on the red carpet with T-Shirt s “time’s up Theresa May we want equal pay… ”
      So yeah Kate was in a sh%ty situation with this one. The palace chose the safe way with this one.

    • Deedee says:

      Yes. Carole (her secret stylist, I suspect) needs to look up how to style a woman of this century. I love the jewelry, but they are a much different green than the dress. They actually would’ve looked better against a black dress. The back view shows all her hair is piled on her shoulders and there’s just a little section left on her back. As for social justice, Kate is a walking anachronism. Her standing up for women would be disingenuous.

  22. spidee!! says:

    Perhaps instead of wearing black dresses all the women should have worn black tie just like the men, to show their equality

    And whatever she did it would have been wrong for some.

  23. Chef Grace says:

    Good for her going green. She is in the latter stage of her pregnancy. Finding formal wear for that could reflect her choice. I had to be matron of honor for my bff when I was 7 months preggers. It was August in Texas. I did not care what I wore by then.
    Also, we as women should be supporting each other, not tearing each other down over the whole black out statement.

  24. Guest says:

    It’s a pretty dress but Kate’s just so average looking. Plus those jewels clash with the dress.

  25. Lyla says:

    It’s her prerogative if she doesn’t want to wear black. I just think that the excuse of royal protocol is lame. It’s not like she’s a stickler for protocol. She’s broken it many times. And since when is being anti-sexual harassment a political stance? Camilla can visit centers that support rape victims and create a wash bag scheme, but no wearing black to the bafta is too political. Yet it’s not politcal for her to wear a black ribbon or don jelwery with hidden symbolism. No, that’s her supporting the cause. Wink wink. /s. That’s reaching, don’t you think? I pointed this out on Twitter and someone came back and with the political thing and said it was because time’s up supports changing the laws and that’s why it’s too political. Again, should changing laws to favor equality and accountability be political? It’s not like other royals haven’t taken a political stance. I mean we remember Charles and the black spider memos. And what about Diana and her land mines, HIV, etc caues? I think doubt Kate donning a black gown would have greatly affect legislation as much as Charles letters to ministers and politicians or Diana’s land mine walk. But it would have signaled that she’s an ally. And when is being for equality a bad thing?

  26. Petty Riperton says:

    Y’all expected a spineless doormat like Kate to do something in support of other women when she has shown she doesn’t care about anyone but herself and William. LMAO

  27. Robert says:

    Her looks are always so boring

  28. Myhairisfullofsecrets says:

    She looks gorgeous! Definitely one of my favorite looks from her.

  29. NotForNothing says:

    Isn’t this almost the EXACT same dress that she wore to the black tie event at the Met in NYC? She was pregnant then, too. I get that maybe her bump / sizing is different this time around, but why not do a totally different dress then? I guess she likes what she likes?

  30. aquarius64 says:

    Kate has worn black evening gowns as duchess before so I don’t get the protocol argument.

  31. Yuhki says:

    I’m pretty sure those aren’t the Cambridge emeralds. Those are rounder not like this one. This one is the set she wore in New York with the other packham dress, the inky blue black one.

  32. Cerys says:

    For once, I have a bit of sympathy for Kate. She was put in a no-win situation with choosing an outfit. People would have criticised her if she wore all black too.

    • formerly known as Amy says:

      Its just sad that she missed an opportunity here. She should have worn a black dress and a brightly colored cape or something. This would have beautifully symbolized the tight rope that BRF walks. I am disappointed because she missed out on an iconic moment for her.

    • notasugarhere says:

      So she chose to wear green (when she’s broken protocol with all-black before) AND she chooses to break out a never-before-seen massive emerald necklace. Way to once again make herself the center of attention. Hot pink coat at 9/11 Memorial ringing any bells?

  33. homeslice says:

    I don’t care one way or the other that she didn’t wear black. I’m annoyed that the green of the emerald and dress didn’t “go” together well. That necklace would have looked smashing if she wore black ;) And pulled that friggin hair back…

  34. formerly known as Amy says:

    Its just sad that she missed an opportunity here. She should have worn a black dress and a brightly colored cape or something. This would have beautifully symbolized the tight rope that BRF walks. I am disappointed because she missed out on an iconic moment for her.

  35. Rachael says:

    But really- who would have criticized her for wearing black?? It’s not like it’s a really political issue. I do not understand how it’s even supposed to be “contentious”— it’s clear as day, which side is the right side to support. The RF, and Kate, do choose to support certain causes, so their/her blatant refusal to support this one makes it look like a slap in the face.

  36. hah says:

    Camilla has done extensive work in the area of domestic violence, sexual assault, and women’s issues. Charles has been active in far more “political” areas such as environmentalism and conservation. Far more people are polarized regarding the latter issue vs the former (except for the silent minority who somehow believe sexual assault is not a bad thing). This isn’t the royal family’s doing–she chooses to do what she wants and no one dictates her clothing. She simply doesn’t care.

  37. Digital Unicorn says:

    On the a Middleton note: Donna Air has finally moved on from the Marshmallow King, she has a new bf and looks happy. No more acting like she can stand to be seen with the wannabe Tasr. The new guy is quite the upgrade and is a successful businessman.


  38. hah says:

    Aside from her utter PR disaster and failure regarding the color choice, so much for “protocol” and her supposed “staidness” …she really seems to favor plunging necklines, thigh high slits, and mini-dress lengths. Not that I care but if that were Meghan people would be screaming about it. And it just shows that the Queen/Royal Famiy have no say over what she wears, it’s all up to her. I seriously doubt the Queen approves of crotch flashing.

  39. perplexed says:

    CAA helped to facilitate a lot of abuse happening to women. CAA is also attached to Time’s Up. So I think Kate probably made the right call in following the Queens’ protocol.

    If some bizarre news comes out about CAA still facilitating abuse while now attached to the Time’s Up movement, the royals might look stupid and be criticized for blindly following celebrities.

  40. Nilber says:

    This is my issue with any popular movement. The cliques start occurring and even the hypocrites look down their nose. If they don’t then they obviously don’t care about the cause.
    It takes away from what Times Up is meant to be about. This has been a long time coming and it’s a cause I believe in strongly. Being a victim isn’t easy. It’s raw and it’s painful. It’s tears late at night so your family doesn’t hear and it’s a secret you keep so people don’t look at you differently.
    I understand the idea and concept and it is powerful statement to wear black at the awards show but to attack someone who doesn’t is petty. It takes away from the statement.
    As far as Kate goes, I agree she needed to own her decision. The way they worded their statement was off-putting. At least she wore a very dark dress and looked great. I can’t help but wonder if she already had this dress picked out before she knew about those wearing black. Maybe…maybe not but I will judge her on her lack of commitment to her causes before I criticize her declining to wear black.
    I hope this makes sense since I’m medicated due to health issues at the moment.

  41. Lizzo says:

    @megan I couldn’t agree more. Until Time’s Up becomes more than lip service and the appearance of Hollywood cleaning up its act (spoiler alert – it isn’t. Real change goes far beyond making a couple of men pariahs for 12 months and “bringing awareness.” We’re very aware and ready for phase 2, people!) – someone who isn’t even in the industry shouldn’t feel pressured into wearing something they don’t want to. As others mentioned – actions speak louder and while she may not be the most active royal, I’d be willing to bet she does more work in this space than many of the trendy pin wearers.

    • Nic919 says:

      Kate has done zero work in this area. When she does actually make appearances at charities and not premieres it relates to children and sports. So her actions currently show that she has no interest in supporting this particular issue. I can point you to the Court Circular which confirms she has never attended a charity regarding victims of sexual assault since her marriage in 2011.

      • Nilber says:

        Ok, my point is still valid. I have to wonder if she wore black that this would have been a problem too. The headlines would read Kate wore black for Time’s Up yet does absolutely nothing for women who are victims. It truly is a lose/lose situation.

  42. starryfish says:

    It’s disappointing that she continues to treat the role of a royal as being nothing more than playing dress up, and the press love her for it. She had the opportunity to finally let her clothes have a purpose and she chose not to (and no it’s not a protocol issue, she wears black all the time). There’s nothing political about saying that women shouldn’t be treated like garbage, and yet her defenders act like she was being asked to join a picket line, rather than merely wear a different pretty dress in a different color. With all of the smart and strong women that have joined royal families around the world, and actually use their positions to bring attention to substantive causes, it’s sad that someone this useless gets held up as the ideal.

    • perplexed says:

      The general sentiment of Time’s Up makes sense. But ultimately it’s a Hollywood celebrity movement. I don’t think it’s for women in general even if they make the sentiment sound like that. There are certain inconsistent actions among people in the entertainment industry. Scarlett Johannsson may call to action for women’s rights, but she also worked with Woody Allen and saw no problem with it. Ditto for Cate Blanchett. Meryl Streep has praised Roman Polanski. Natalie Portman signed the petition for Roman Polanski. The royals aren’t going to call out their hypocrisy, but they also probably don’t want to be associated with a celebrity-branded movement that has individuals that are inconsistent in their motives.

      • Nic919 says:

        A movement needs to start somewhere and time’s up is simply a starting point. This is similar to when actors started to wear red ribbons for AIDS awareness. It started at awards shows because there is an international audience and the message evolves from there. This is not just a Hollywood thing, unless you think that women outside of Hollywood don’t experience sexual harassment and sexual assault. The hypocrisy of a certain few about Polanski or Allen does not invalidate the movement and suggesting that it does sides with the MRAs out there. There are no movements with perfect people and this is more excuse finding to defend a woman who has done literally nothing for other women and instead has lived a luxurious lifestyle on the backs of taxpayers.

      • perplexed says:

        “This is not just a Hollywood thing,”

        The Time’s UP initiative itself is a Hollywood thing. Their website itself makes that clear. It was started by CAA agents. CAA itself allowed women to be harassed, abused and raped. Rose McGowan, a victim of Harvey Weinstein, herself has criticized CAA’s role in it.

        Yes, I am aware that people in other industries are abused. But the Time’s UP website makes it clear how the movement was started by CAA agents. It is impossible not to overlook the connection. CAA should have never allowed any of these women to be cruelly abused in the worst ways possible in the first place. If corporate agencies inside this particular initiative are hypocritical in how they have approached the treatment of women, I think it is more than fair for people in the public at large to notice and note this. Noticing this dissonance is no different than noticing when a politician’s actions and words don’t match each other.

        Movements don’t have perfect people, but the level of enabling and then cover-up CAA has done is quite astonishing and disgusting. I don’t see why we should be asked to be blind to that.

        There have also been women’s movements in the past (i.e the suffragettes, the 60s calls for reform, etc). I don’t see why we should be required to see Time’s UP as the face of all of them. I believe in women’s causes– however, I can choose which organizations support women’s causes best rather than choose only one initiative as the face of all of them just because actress X started an Instagram because of it.

      • Nic919 says:

        Some of the suffragettes believed in eugenics and were racist, so do women give the vote back? No. This is total nitpicking and rewriting history. Time’s Up didn’t exist until after the Golden Globes and the idea of wearing black was announced well before Time’s UP was created. Wearing black doesn’t mean that you are handing a cheque over to CAA and approving of how they enabled Weinstein and other predators. Wearing black simply brings attention to the issue of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

        The goalposts always get moved to defend her selfish behaviour.

      • perplexed says:

        “Some of the suffragettes believed in eugenics and were racist, so do women give the vote back? No. ”

        We can still find fault with the hypocrisy of the participants of the Time’s Up initiative (i.e James Franco). I never said women should give the vote back. Where you’re getting that from, I have no idea. I’m saying there are multiple organizations one can lend their voice to in this day and age, and it’s no longer a requirement for us to see only a Hollywood branded movement as the sole representative. Whether you align with Time’s Up isn’t wholly indicative of where your allegiances lie, considering the ethical Cris-crossing that’s going on within it (i.e asking women not to be abused but still working with Woody Allen — that’s in direct contradiction to what the Time’s Up initiative is supposed to be about. The contradiction is way more extreme in this initiative than in others.) Dylan Farrow has herself pointed out the disconnect).

        “Wearing black doesn’t mean that you are handing a cheque over to CAA and approving of how they enabled Weinstein and other predators”

        Maybe one’s opinion has to do with whether you think wearing black will actually effect change. I don’t think wearing a black dress makes any difference. If you think wearing a black dress makes a difference, that’s fine. I’m of the opinion that wearing a black dress doesn’t bring about any systemic change.

        “The goalposts always get moved to defend her selfish behaviour.”

        I don’t think any goalposts are being moved. I think some of the people already involved in the initiative have already been selfish anyway. Which is why I don’t think wearing a black dress makes any difference. You can take Kate out of the equation completely, and I still don’t think wearing a black difference makes any difference. There are some of us who genuinely don’t think a black dress is going to solve anything. And a lot of these people involved in Time’s Up have been criticized for their hypocrisy by the actual victims. It’s happened in other postings about the matter. But because Kate is involved, it’s suddenly nitpicking.

  43. Sharon Lea says:

    At the very least, I am happy the Swedish royals have been supportive of the cause. “Queen Silvia and Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden made a surprise visit to the South Theatre in Stockholm on Sunday to support the #MeToo campaign.”

  44. Honey says:

    The Guardian has some behind the scenes pictures of the BAFTA awards. If you scroll through, there is a picture of Kate hyena laughing with some of the actors. I also didn’t realize how hugely pregnant she’s become. It’s also funny to me how women can go from having a regular mid-size pregnancy belly one day to whoa- shit that baby (literal baby) has gotten 3D huge just the next.

    Link: https://www.theguardian.com/film/gallery/2018/feb/19/behind-the-scenes-at-the-2018-bafta-film-awards-in-pictures

  45. M.A.F. says:

    Just because she isn’t wearing black, doesn’t mean she doesn’t support the movement. Just because she isn’t vocal about it, doesn’t mean she isn’t on board. Not everyone who supports a movement has to be visible. But I’m sure people on here will just yell at her anyways.

  46. Cee says:

    Lainey makes a great point in her article regarding Kate’s “misinformation”:
    1. “Was someone telling her that by wearing black, she’d be making a political statement? Or was she worried that by wearing black, she’d be making a political statement? Do they and she understand at all that this is not a political statement?”

    2. “The 100 Women in Hedge Funds Philanthropic Initiatives is on the list of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s patronages! This is an agency that seeks to empower women in the investment industries and to help advance their careers. Their careers cannot advance if they are sexually harassed and NOT PAID EQUALLY! How (edit for cursing) can they not see that direct association between Time’s Up and one of the organisations they themselves support?”

    3. “When someone with the profile of Catherine Cambridge avoids being onside with gender pay equality and openly taking a stand against sexual harassment, which should be as “safe” to support as donating to the food bank, it tells you how profoundly insidious the misinformation and the miseducation has been. ”

    This says it all. Her team failed her. She failed herself. Even her privileged education has failed her.

    • Lorelai says:

      @CEE: Such a great post! Thank you!

    • perplexed says:

      The organization Prince Phillip supports would have been extensively vetted.

      Didn’t Lainey spread rumours about certain actresses (ie Gretchen Mol and Blake Lively)? And I’m expected to take her seriously?

      • magnoliarose says:

        No, she didn’t. Those rumors had been around since the early 2000s. You can’t blame her for repeating what was said all over the internet and is still not accepted as only rumors.

        Anything about Weinstein is not at her feet.

      • perplexed says:

        But when you’re a respected columnist, I think that repeating of gossip perpetuates bad treatment of women. She’s not an anonymous commentator bantering with other people. Her name carries a certain degree of credibility. So I do think some of those columnists are perpetuating behaviour they try to condemn, imo. Would I blame her for what Weinstein did? No, I would never go that far. But I do think there is a dissonance on her end if she doesn’t think she’s not perpetuating certain stereotypes about actresses. I would feel pretty guilty being part of that gossip industry that allows those rumours to circulate and take a life on their own. Something isn’t quite right or ethical about doing that, imo. It does make it harder for me to take her seriously whereas I’m more likely to listen to someone who doesn’t profit off of gossip and spreading what others have repeated. In all honesty, I do find what Lainey does (even if she’s just repeating what others have said) to be somewhat distasteful.

      • magnoliarose says:


        So as I understand your comment, you object to the fact that she has a name and a face and isn’t an anonymous commenter or blogger? I will admit I don’t read Lainey anymore and haven’t for many years unless someone sends me there. My reasons are different though.
        I guess it comes down to personal tastes and lines in the sand. I think Harvey tainted a lot of actresses and some that he had a relationship with are going to suffer from his absence. I think he was so horrible that he created some appalling gossip surrounding him. That is her business, to gossip and he offered a lot of it and a lot of it turns out is correct.
        That Blind Item is tricky. But gossip is tricky too because we are divulging secrets and things celebs don’t want to be known, so I don’t think ethics come into it one way or the other.
        However, we each have to live with our own values judgments so I can respect that you feel the way you do even I disagree.

      • perplexed says:

        “So as I understand your comment, you object to the fact that she has a name and a face and isn’t an anonymous commenter or blogger?”

        Not really. I would object to anonymous commenting as well. (However, I do think anonymous commentating is more likely to be called out by others when a story sounds way too ridiculous. People will banter, and if a story sounds totally off the wall, that anonymous commentator will be called out). I don’t think anonymous commentators really carry any credibility though.

        What I think is that Lainey’s name carries with it a certain credibility that made people believe how she discussed the casting couch issue. If I see an anonymous commentator talking about gossip item X, I’m more likely to dismiss it. Very rarely do I take anonymous commentating as “fact.” But when someone who has credibility puts forward an item, there is an inclination from my end to believe what the person is saying. I assume other people make the same mistake (now I’m less likely to make that mistake, however). She also makes a profit off of what she writes, and if she wasn’t paid would she bother writing some of the strange stuff that she does? Now that I’ve seen op-eds written by Gretchen Mol, I also think items written by her like this are problematic and are tainted by a sexism which she may not be fully conscious of:


        Gretchen Mol said this in her OP-ED: “The consistent implication was that actresses were eager for the bargain, that we wanted fame and fortune so desperately that we would make this kind of nauseating concession. This is another kind of misogyny, and blame-shifting.” Ultimately, I do think some gossip columnists perpetuated sexist narratives. Maybe their intent wasn’t malice, but it was still sexist.

      • Cee says:

        @perplexed – I understand your issues regarding LaineyGossip, however this is her opinion, and it is valid, and a good read on the situation. This isn’t gossip or “what people are saying in the industry”.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I think Lainey has it wrong regarding 100 WHF. The 100 WHF do targeted fund raising each year, and direct those funds to the charity of their choice. For a three year block they choose to give that money to that Royal Foundation. It wasn’t W&K&H supporting 100 WHF but rather the other way round.

      When it came down to it, the 100 Women in Hedge Funds chose Sophie Wessex as their royal patron for the Next Generation initiatives. She attends events for them in different countries, advocating for more inclusion for women in the finance industry.

  47. applepie says:

    I was looking at her Russell sign….I hope it isn’t though……If it is then that’s really sad. She is so tiny. wonder if that’s why you don’t see VB’s hands much.

  48. CrystalBall says:

    People who wear 1 million pounds in jewels around their uncaring necks are always part of the problem, never the solution. Hypocrites – do you really believe her when she says at a charity visit ‘you are very special to me’??? Come on, people, wake up! Only what benefits her directly is very special to her.

  49. WendyNerd says:

    And of course she wore her hair down, obscuring the jewels for no good reason. She would have looked so lovely with her hair up too.

  50. whatever says:

    I support the cause but let’s be honest the ‘blackout’ is beyond hypocritical.

    Edit – I agree with the points @perplexed has made in this thread.

  51. sage says:

    Maybe like Frances McDormand, Kate has a problem with compliance, maybe she doesn’t care about the movement, maybe the grey men told her not to get involved and stay above it…lol. who knows.

    It’s amusing people still expect her to have substance.

    The jewels clash with the dress and her makeup is too heavy.

  52. perplexed says:

    Frances McDormand wore pink, and no one seems to care despite the fact that she actually is in the industry. I don’t get the rules on the dress code. Maybe people understand that Frances McDormand and Kate aren’t the ones abusing and harassing other women.

  53. martha says:

    Her dress looks more “black out” to me than tonnes of black sparkling dresses.
    If the cause and not the show was the main point, they would all wear simple black shirt and pants, donate all money they spent on dresses to the organizations supporting women.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She chose to wear green, not black. Whether or not other outfits sparkled, you cannot change the fact that she chose to wear green.

      Unlikely the other women paid for those outfits, as the designers would have dressed them for free for the advertising. Many then donate the outfits to charity afterwards. Win-win.

  54. Jayna says:

    She looks lovely and it’s a very muted deep green, that blended in with black gowns fine. There’s bigger issues than what a very pregnant royal wore to the BAFTAs. I am cynical about the movie industry right now anyway and a lot of hypocrisy. I’m sounding like Rose McGowan. LOL And I agree with @Martha. There are tons of actresses in very sparkly gowns even if black. Kate’s was a very subdued deep color.

    Where’s the outrage for Frances McDormand, who is part of the industry? Where’s all of the posts in outrage of her not supporting her fellow actresses wearing black? What? Oh, crickets. I see.

    I get the point people are making on here about #timesup and black gowns. I just find it a non-issue about Kate’s gown. She’s very pregnant and was more muted in color than a lot of those black gowns. I find Frances McDormand far more problematic if I were to care whether someone wore black or not. I don’t care. It’ their choice. I won’t bully them. But people don’t touch her. How interesting. She’s allowed to do what she wants to do.

  55. Marian says:

    Kate starts to look plastic. Especially in the 4th pic? Fillers?

  56. Patty says:

    I wish she had her up. The hair distracts from the necklace. That necklace is a statement piece. You don’t wear it with your hair flouncing about everywhere.

    I could care less about her not wearing black. At this point some of these #metoo women are just acting like bullies toward other women. I support the original founder and her intent. It’s too bad it’s been co-opted by other people. I don’t support this Hollywood “we are all part of the problem but let’s all wear black in solidarity and attack women who don’t” #metoo business. They can miss me with that.

  57. Seraphina says:

    Well, I will have to break down and say bravo to Kate. Well done. The color looks beautiful on her and the color is perfect while not going black. Love the jewels. Well done Kate. Well done.

  58. vava says:

    I’ve lost interest in Kate. She’s presentable here, but doesn’t have any charisma or style that I will probably follow in the future.

    I like the emeralds, but would redesign that necklace. The dress: meh.

    Does she even say anything of interest these days? If so, I guess I missed it. I hope her delivery goes well and that the baby is healthy.

  59. spidee!! says:

    I feel uneasy about women being sort of pushed into this sort of demonstration, especially when in a year’s time will it have made a difference?

  60. JaneDoesWork says:

    What’s interesting about this for me is that she wears a LOT of black gowns and often re-wears them. I bet she had been planning on wearing something black and was told she needed a different color and chose this deep mossy green to strike a middle ground. I love the cut, I especially love the sleeves. It’s super elegant and allows the jewels to pop. I’m not crazy about the color, it’s not rich/vibrant enough for me. Maybe its the cameras but its just a little muddy and I’m not crazy about that. In any case, this is the last time that Kate will be pregnant so its the last time we will see it.

  61. Dolly says:

    This was an easy touchdown for Kate, and she fumbled. All she had to do was the one thing she’s best at. Wear a dress. Not make a statement or a speech. Just wear a dress. She would have been universally praised by the press as a champion for women’s rights. Her critics would have to shut it for a good while. It was an easy PR win before going into pre-baby hiding. I just don’t get her.