Richard Kay at the Daily Mail is not following the new sacred rule which was laid down by the defenders of the Duchess of Cambridge: Kate and Meghan Markle must never, ever be compared… unless Kate comes out favorably. That’s the only time it’s “allowed” to compare the two. But one must never make mention of the fact that Kate is changing before our very eyes with the entrance of Meghan into the royal fold. One must always praise Kate. Well, Richard Kay is trying. Kay wrote a fascinating and shady piece comparing Meghan and Kate, and noting that Kate seems to be doing some things differently now that Meghan is around. While Kay goes out of his way to praise and compliment Kate – if he didn’t do that, Kate’s sugary defenders would demand his head on a spike – there’s some really interesting subtext in what he writes. You can read the full piece here. Some highlights:
The photos of Kate & the kids at William’s polo match: [The photos showed] no sign of resentment at being photographed — something she has displayed in the past — no suggestion of self-pity. Instead, there is a radiance that says: ‘Here I am, the happiest woman in the world.’
Kate is “upping her game” because of Meghan too: When Harry and Meghan gave their post-engagement interview, the prince spoke of the challenge the actress set. As he recalled, he told himself: ‘I am really going to have to up my game here.’ Harry, it seems, has not been the only one to up their game — in palace corridors they are saying that so, too, has the Duchess of Cambridge.
Kate is copying Meghan: The casual dress she wore for the family visit to Beaufort Polo Club on Sunday that displayed her open neck owed much to the ‘bateau’-style Meghan chose, not just for her wedding dress but also at Trooping. There is no doubt the couture chic of Meghan has drawn comparisons with Kate’s more High Street look. In fact, the dress sense of both women is highly prized — but are they rivals? Courtiers believe there could be a nuanced message here. As elegant and chic as Kate looked, her £39.99 Zara dress will be much more affordable to the average British woman than Meghan’s high-end fashion choices.
Criticism for Meghan’s off-the-shoulder look: There was surprise that Meghan chose the off-the-shoulder look again on Saturday. ‘She looked like she was going to a cocktail party rather than the formality of the Queen’s birthday parade,’ says a former palace official. ‘It’s a difficult act to pull off, and these are early days, but maybe she’s trying to be a little too cutting edge. In her early days, Kate had to be subtly told not to show so much leg, so it can happen to anyone.’
Kate can seem stiff: Many at the Palace have warmed to the arrival of the American for just those reasons, of course. Kate can come across as stiff and rather formal alongside the more spontaneous and articulate Meghan.
Meghan was nervous: Meanwhile, [Meghan’s] adjustment to royal life is taking time. Insiders say she was ‘very nervous’ on her first appearance on the Palace balcony and Harry was a reassuring presence at her side. Both Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall have recognised that such is the scale of the change in her life from screen star to working duchess that she will need extra time to adapt. ‘They are trying to keep things light to ensure she doesn’t get overwhelmed by the idea of duty,’ says a friend of the Prince. ‘There are protocols to observe, but they are saying that things can be done differently and no one will really raise too much of an eyebrow.’
Meghan needs to get pregnant right away: There is one area where Meghan cannot compete with Kate — children. Harry yearns to become a father and the sight of George and Charlotte playing in the sunshine also carried a powerful message. For Kate was showing that, as a member of the Royal Family, being a mother is the most important thing of all. So it may be that rather than Kate copying Meghan, Meghan will want to copy Kate.
I’m laughing at the idea that Meghan would “copy Kate” by… getting pregnant. Kate is THE FIRST royal woman to ever have royal babies, don’t you know. And I think Meghan will be different there too – Kate and William waited to get pregnant until they had been married about a year and a half. I don’t think Harry and Meghan will follow the same timeline – Meghan will want to get pregnant right away, I have no doubt. And when she does get knocked up, we’ll see more comparisons… about how much or how little Meghan works during her pregnancy, etc. As for Kay’s article… I think it’s just an old-guard royal reporter taking note of the obvious, that Kate is suddenly very, very keen to be seen. She’s very keen to ensure that people don’t “forget” about her.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I’ve got nothing to say, other than godd@mn, Kate is beautiful since the birth of Louis.
Oh, and the press needs to stop with the manufactured Meghan vs. Kate that they are pushing.
She looks more like Pippa.
I really don’t see it. I mean, they have a family resemblance, but I think Kate has the more beautiful face.
Kate was helped along considerably by her nose job(s). I don’t really know if Pippa ever had one….?
Half of her face looks like Pippa the other like Carole. There was a comparison on a site a few years ago, mirroring famous faces to show what they’d look like if their faces were symmetrical. Mirrored one way, she looks exactly like Pippa, the other exactly like Carole.
This story isn’t Kate has upped her game. This is the establishment Baby Shaming MM.
I agree with you, LizB. And I have never thought Kate and Pippa looked alike, except for their bodies.
In the casual pictures she looks good but at Trooping she looked very matronly.
I think its the added weight. I mean that nicely. I think after Charlotte she lost the baby weight very quickly. I think this time she has held onto some of it (what weight she did gain lol) and I think her face looks a lot better when its a little bit fuller.
You’re right. I’ve never been a Kate supporter but we are hardly going to forget about her. She’s married to the future king and is going to become more prominent as time goes on. Meghan is not. While I like the idea of Meghan pushing things forward, I suspect that in time the British people and press will get bored of that and Kate’s more rigid, rule abiding ways will work out in her favour. There is only so far you can be progressive with the monarchy.
Noodles, I agree. While I love MM and the fresh air that has come in with her, Kate is the future monarchy. Her rigid and bland nature is what many see as needed. I just wish she had the work ethic that the senior royals do. I think that bland and boring would be ok with she worked that arse off. Other European royals do it, why can’t Will and Kate.
I too think Kate’s more rigid, rule-abiding (sort of) ways will work in her favor. They’re not exactly harming her now. Someone was posting polls the other day and it seems that most who cared about her viewed her favorably*. Maybe she doesn’t get as much solo attention as she once did, but that’s not surprising. No one can maintain peak popularity for long.
I think Lainey is the one who said the family likes her because she is stable, whether or not that’s true Kate does project an image of stability to the public. Her manner of dress is consistent though not particularly exciting. She was consistently there during the dating years and is going nowhere now that they’re married. Even her family seems quite constant.
In many ways traditional gender roles are still favored and Kate embodies them. That’s why I can’t fully get onboard the Middleton’s are panicking line of thought. It’s not necessary. The narrative between Kate and Meghan is already written. The heir’s wife vs the spare’s wife, Madonna and the whore, the regal English women vs the gauche, interfering American and it goes on and on and on. It’s not a fight because there’s already a winner and a loser.
*Here’s a recent comment about Kate (and William) from TFS: “… she’s a trouper, no doubt about it. I like the new couple, but the difference is you practically never get a whiff of self-indulgence from these two.” I wouldn’t be shocked if a lot of people view them this way, especially those who are aware of the royals but don’t keep a particularly close watch of them.
Scram: I think you’ve hit the nail on the head perfectly with the gender roles issue. Kate is the epitome of traditional female, mom with kids who doesn’t work or say too much and many people are more comfortable with that then Meghan, the brash American who dares to openly state she is a feminist. So Kate is forgiven a lot because a large segment of society still has issues with women pushing gender norms. It’s also why we see the slams on Meghan that she is suddenly not a feminist for marrying Harry, as if it is a zero sum game.
Also important to note that Kate has been married for seven years and there doesn’t seem to be a sign of trouble in the marriage. Charles and Diana lasted not even 5 years but kept the charade going with increasing hostility and passive aggressiveness. Kate slips in sly digs at William now and again, but hasn’t pulled a stunt to make William actually look bad.
What I mean to say is, Kate represents stability. She’s bland and boring, sure. But you know she’ll be bland and boring for years to come. The monarchy can count on her to dress up and smile and not rock the boat.
Most people outside of the UK don’t bother to dig deep into royal families. They buy magazines and think Kate and William and their kids are the perfect family. Monarchies can try to modernize themselves all they want but the rigid structure will always remain. It is the backbone of most monarchies. Their existence also depends on their ability to be as “different” from the public as possible. Believe it or not, most royal watchers on other forums prefer pomp and excess than humility from royals. The main reasoning is: if they behave just like us, dress like us, then what’s the point of having them around?
Take a look at the Order of Splendour website where Queen Letizia was always criticized for “dressing like a bank manager” but Queen Maxima is hailed for wearing as much royal jewelry as she could and being as “look at me!” as possible. These people want royals to look fancy and untouchable, not someone you can strike an actual conversation with. They don’t talk about work ethics or royals mooching off the public. They just want to see the clothes and the jewels.
In this regard, Kate is doing well in a lot of people’s eyes. She has provided heirs for the monarchy to secure its future. She shows up in boring outfits and gets called elegant and every inch a royal. She has nothing to worry about when it comes to public perception as there’s only a small percentage of people in the UK and outside of it who thinks she’s lazy and uninspired.
@lizb yes, the constant pitting these women against each other is so tired. Can we just stop with this archaic bull that women cant be friends.
But women always compete! They couldn’t possibly just be normal inlaws who get along okay.
Ridiculous to compare the cost of Meghan’s (admittedly mediocre) dress for the Trooping of the Colour and the £39 Zara dress Kate wore to a polo match. If Meghan showed up to the formal Trooping of the Colour in a £39 high street dress there would be outrage and it would be labelled as deeply disrespectful. So his point about Kate coming off the better for wearing a cheap dress is nonsense – they were at completely different events!
And the most important thing a woman can do is have babies? That is dangerous territory, even when you are discussing royalty.
that line about babies and motherhood bothered me too, almost as if he is implying that Meghan can’t really “compete” (*ugh*) with Kate until she becomes a mom and fulfills her most important role. blech.
It is brf. Women make babies. I remember that Diana felt like her role was only to give an heir and a spare.
As for the dress, it has trendy again during last and this summer.
And the only person who ever worked was Markle. Lazy Kate…Lazy Will, Harry, … older royals do more ceremonies cos they cannot put on a fashion show. But lets not pretend that Chucks medals are for real.
It is the line frequently used on here and other places by her ardent defenders. That Kate needs to do nothing other than reproduce and raise kids. It is all over these threads.
Including yesterday. Motherhood excuses her from doing any work, even if work is just showing up for an hour or so once in a while. The pre baby years of laziness are ignored as is the fact that two of her kids are now in school most of the day.
Perfectly put article. Kate has all of a sudden become “keen” to be seen in public with her children. it will be interesting to see if she becomes “keen” to work once her maternity leave is over.
Of course, the Catherine fans will be up in arms at the thought of their idol being expected to leave her children with the nannies and step out for an hour or two a week. I wonder if Meghan will be given the same leeway if she has children ….
I think there was more pressure on Kate to have children then Meg. Kate is the one who ensures the Royal line continues, Meg and Harry’s kids, if they choose to have any, are so far down the line that it wouldn’t really matter.
The royal line continues regardless of if it goes sideways, as it did to make the current queen the monarch. As it did to make her grandfather king after his old brother passed away. 5000 people in the line, and that’s just the ones they bother to track.
Unfortunately there is pressure on Meghan to get pregnant because she is a) almost 37 and b) she is the wife of the favourite royal c) the public want to see Harry have kids.
RE: babies – I find it troubling too.
But I also find it troubling that as soon as the engagement talk started people started guessing on when Meghan would have babies, and since the wedding bump watch has started – some implying she was pregnant for the ceremony.
Beyond that- a LOT of people were going on about what a short time frame Meghan has for having children, how she’ll need to be quick about it, and constantly talking about their sex life.
I think both are equally problematic, though in somewhat different ways. It still boils down to women HAVING to have kids, women having a (largely inaccurate) brief window to have them, and assuming that everyone will want them.
Exactly. Kate was also supposed to be too skinny to get pregnant. See what happened.. but Kate to had an heir, Meghan declared she wanted to so maybe that’s why we speculate
I just can’t with that loose cap sleeve. Looks so unflattering on, well, pretty much everyone, the way it skeedadles around the back.
The Charles and Diana was gossip was interesting because they were both leaking left, right and centre. The gossip wasn’t gossip…it was real!
But both Meghan and Kate are mysteries to me, regardless of how outgoing Meghan is or formal Kate is. I still have no idea what they’re really thinking because no one is quoting from them directly (this article doesn’t even claim to be hearing from “sources” like People magazine). I’ve also never heard of a woman copying another woman’s pregnancy.
I noticed that Kate seemed relaxed and really enjoying her children at the polo match, but then I’ve never noticed her to be stressed or concerned about how they behave.
I predict we will see tallies for appearances at the end of the year and Meghan’s will be higher.
We will be reminded that Kate had a baby, but if you compare the event rate of Kate and Meghan last year, Kate did more.
Meghan will be forced to be kiss the ring in numerous ways to make Kate look good, the way Harry can’t out work his brother.
Petty family squabbles are fun!
Unfortunately for royals the most important thing they can do IS have babies. Consider the outrage if h&m didn’t have babies. Got to keep the ratings up and kids are the most effective ways of doing that.
Did you fail to notice the outrage when they had a second and third child, especially in the face of government tax benefits being cut off for everyone else after their second child? The more kids they have, the louder the anti-monarchy voices get.
Belgium managed fine with the throne going brother to brother to nephew/son. While it was a personal sadness to the king and queen, the throne was never in danger. Always plenty of people in line.
@AmandaPanda, thank you. You nailed it with “got to keep the ratings up” because at the end of the day, that is *all* that matters — that there is interest in them. That crowds show up for their appearances and buy magazines and tea towels and get excited for milestone events.
The self-proclaimed “royal experts” here and on Twitter love to scream that the BRF aren’t celebrities, that celebrities are only actors and athletes etc., but they are wrong. This is the literal definition of a celebrity and the members of the royal family fit the bill:
CELEBRITY
“—noun, plural ce·leb·ri·ties for 1.
a famous or well-known person.
fame; renown.
Origin: 1350–1400; Middle English < Latin celebritās multitude, fame, festal celebration, equivalent to celebr- (stem of celeber) often repeated, famous + -itās -ity
—Related forms
non·ce·leb·ri·ty, noun”
So how is it that they’re not celebrities? I’ll wait.
People need to get over themselves. It is all about manufacturing interest from the public. That is the reason for their existence. And right now, Meghan is far more interesting and popular than Kate is, so Kate is behaving accordingly. This might change in the future and that’s fine. But denying it right now is ridiculous because the proof is right in front of our eyes.
“Meghan’s adjustment to royal life is taking time” Eh they got married about three weeks ago, I think you can allow her a little more time to adjust.
And she already appears to do more work!
@Zapp Brannigan – another week and that’s it. End of June at the absolute latest!
If she hasn’t demonstrably mastered every last single point of royal etiquette by then, I think the queen should send Meghan one of those ‘Thank you for your interest. Unfortunately, on this occasion you have been unsuccessful, but we wish you every success in your future endeavors’ letters, followed by an immediate annulment of the marriage.
Harsh but fair.
The Dailymail is messy.
The pics of Kate running down the hill at the polo match are in a new article showing she was running towards one of William’s polo team mates. It just made me laugh because they were hinting about how keen she was to get to him.
The Fail is about to get a new Editor in Chief. Paul Dacre (the current one) is a family friend of the Middleton’s and is the reason why they get so much positive and regular coverage in that rag. The online edition has a different editor so that’s why the coverage is more snarky. Same goes for the Cambridges.
Will be interesting to see if the tone of the coverage changes when the new guy takes over. Not sure when Dacre leaves.
The new guy was editor of Tatler during the dating years. He was their media advisor before they befriended Paul Ducre.
I expect overall favourable coverage to continue and or Tatler-esque articles about them to be unveiled.
Though he did boob with that Wisteria sisters nickname. I don’t think he realised that it was a double entendre and not in a good way for Kate and Pippa.
Perhaps DM appreciates the insider tips they get from the Middletons, so Dacre hinted the Tatler fellow would be a good pick.
@LAK please do explain the double entendre in Wisteria, I am thick.
Wisteria is a climbing vine that is hard to eradicate and climbs high very fast. It is far from a compliment. It is calling them shameless social climbers who are impervious to the element. Social climbing barnacles.
PrincessK: What Magnoliarose said. Wisteria is essentially a weed and it’s really hard to remove once it takes root.
The Tatler description was that they were Wisteria sisters because Wisteria is pretty, fragrant and a ferocious climber!!
Thanks magnoliarose and LAK. I knew that it was about ‘social climbing’ but I did not know that it ‘climbs fast’ or that it was ‘pretty’ , ‘fragrant’ and that its ‘hard to eradicate once it takes root’ (limpet?), and that its essentially a ‘weed’…lol!
Maybe it took a year and a half for Kate to get pregnant first time around…it might take Megan time too, she is like 36
I believe Kate was not allowed to get pregnant due to the Queen’s jubilee year…
I believe the royal couples work on having kids whenever they want to try to get pregnant. It is only Kate who disappeared so much while expecting and after delivering; the rest keep working.
Was Kate trying for that long, though? I’m not her ob/gyn but I assumed they weren’t trying to get pregnant right out of the gate. I don’t really know.
If Meghan gets pregnant within the next couple of months she will be 3 or 4 months pregnant on the Australia trip, her first big tour, is that a good thing?
For most women it would be no big idea. It’s not like she’s going to be backpacking with a heavy pack or even away from medical attention should she need it.
They need to take some time and settle into being a couple. She’s got plenty of time to have two kids. Maybe wait until the end of the year and then start trying.
Kate always looks most happy when she has her kids about her. I don’t really have an opinion about her and I don’t want to compare the two. I am really impressed by Meghan though. She really has that natural and easygoing way of interacting with people that seems beyond my introverted reach and I think she will do great. She seems to like it and seems genuinely interested.
True.
Is it just wanting to be seen though? I noticed Kate not only wore one of the most imposing hats at the trooping we’ve even seen her wear, but she must have also been wearing one of the highest heels we’ve seen her wear too because the combination dwarfed even her 6”3 husband!
Under normal circumstances, that wouldn’t mean much, but given that outfit was worn on an occasion where she knew she would be occupying a front and centre position with newer members of the family behind her who were already significantly smaller than her…..I don’t know. I just found it quite inconsiderate if I’m being kind, and passive aggressive if I’m being honest.
Coupled with some of the other little incidents (wearing an almost white outfit for Meghan’s wedding)……it’s starting to build a picture…..let me leave it at that.
Now now remember that outfit was yellow. LOL.
I agree with you. It’s building a picture.
After a while, the coincidences start to become a pattern. I guess we shall see how this plays out.
I noticed Kate seemed super tall standing in the balcony. She dwarfed everyone around her. Like “All eyes on me!” I was also surprised by the polo game pics. The kids are darling, Kate looked all relaxed and radiant. Just seemed so out of the ordinary for press shy and over controlling W&K. I’m side-eying the whole thing. Looks like some of Diana’s ability to control the media has rubbed off.
Diana didn’t control the media. She played lots of dangerous games and yanked their chains often.
She’s so tall, what nerve! She needs to wear flats. 🙄
@ Becks
Yellow my ass. Lol. The fact that so many commenters on so many websites have found cause to debate the colour for the last 3 weeks show that it was the exact wrong outfit to pick. Or maybe the perfect one, depending on what the wearer was hoping for.
@ Anare
Agree with you completely. The polo pictures ARE absolutely gorgeous and the kids are so adorable. Only issue is, it’s such a departure from her normal attitude towards sharing pictures of her family with the press that one does have to ask the question.
@ NIC919
Let’s indeed see how it plays out. I’ve actually got a few other “incidents” that I find questionable (each one designed to *just* fly under the radar) but I’m not here trying to build a narrative against Kate, so I’ll leave them out (for now).
@BellaD I was joking 😉 I agree with you completely. If it wasn’t yellow, it was close enough to it to make it a poor choice.
Lol…..of course I knew you were joking. 😂
I thought she chose the higher heels to make herself look slimmer. She is probably still conscious of the leftover baby weight and chose height to mask it. I personally think she looks absolutely gorgeous these days.
Bella DuPont, as a nearly six foot tall woman I say good for Kate if she wanted to wear high heels. I was always self conscious when I was younger. Is it her fault the other members of the RF are shorter? You are saying that her height is a detriment, something she needs to compensate for, that it will be interpreted as “look at me.” Is she supposed factor that into her wardrobe, that she had better look more in line with everyone’s height? Why aren’t THEY taller? She should wear flats and look dowdy?
Women, whether we are tall or overweight or whatever, are taught that we shouldn’t take up too much room in the world. Men can take up as much room as they like. No one cares that William is taller than the other male royals. We are supposed to be small, we better diet our bodies down to the minimum. It took me many years to get over that feeling, particularly when I was pregnant and took up even more room. Now, in my sixties, I love being tall. My daughter is nearly my height and thank goodness she loves wearing high heels and feeling proud of herself.
For the record I think Kate should “work” more, I think the whole “royal” family thing is silly. I just think throwing shade at her height is ridiculous.
@ Minx
I think you misunderstood me. I’m only 5’7 myself, but I come from a tall family. Both my brothers are 6’5 and 6’6 and my sister is 5’10. So I have absolutely nothing against being naturally tall. It’s a gift.
However, Kate is not THAT tall. She’s artificially enhanced her height (which is not bad in and of itself). But then she’s used this artificial enhancement as a way of sidelining other members of the family.
I’m used to my brothers constantly trying to ensure that they’re not in the way of smaller people. They constantly and consciously make the effort of standing behind shorter people so everyone has a chance to see and participate.
Don’t misunderstand me, they’re complete *dicks* in many other ways, but this is just common curtesy when you’re naturally vertically gifted, moreso when you’ve artificially attained said height.
She made no effort (that I could see) to try to make sure that Meghan at least got to enjoy the experience as a first timer. She was comfortable just standing there like a self-made mountain, blocking the entire view, feeling entitled.
I’ve defended Kate on countless occasions, but the last few months are showing me another side to her. I’m hoping she doesn’t make me completely change my view of her, eventually.
“However, Kate is not THAT tall. She’s artificially enhanced her height (which is not bad in and of itself). But then she’s used this artificial enhancement as a way of sidelining other members of the family.”
I mean – maybe? But I feel like it’s possible that she just likes to wear heels. Maybe there are times where she wants to steal focus. Maybe we’re looking for patterns where there aren’t clear ones sometimes. But I think there’s at least SOME possibility that it could be both and not just one or the other.
Besides that – is it really her job to make sure Meghan enjoys her first experience at this event? I mean – there’s plenty of other people who could just as easily do that. Harry, Will, Camilla, Charles, etc etc. I don’t think it’s fair to put that all on Kate when others could have easily done something. Even if Kate was doing it on purpose, all Will would have to do is shuffle over and say “oh, lets make sure Meghan can see” or whatever.
I think there’s a certain amount of Kate vs Meghan burnout happening. I think (myself included) have been a bit more critical than necessary of both women. We’re doing a lot of assuming when it comes to their motivations and feelings. We don’t know that Kate is doing certain things on purpose, and we don’t know that Meghan is somehow offended or put out by them. We also don’t know that everything Meghan says or does is more worthy than what Kate has to contribute. But there’s a certain amount of looking for slights and patterns where maybe there just isn’t really one. And a lot of taking minor things and making them huge issues.
At the end of the day – both women are different. I don’t think Kate is sitting around wringing her hands and laughing maniacally about wearing slightly taller shoes than normal (maybe she’s happy to be able to wear higher ones now that she’s delivered) and I don’t think Meghan is crying herself to sleep over how horrible Kate has been to her. I think they’re probably going to get on similarly to any other sister in laws, and they just have their own interests and different backgrounds. In the same way that Kate isn’t a complete sociopath I don’t think Meghan is some sort of pure saint constantly ducking from passive aggressive blows from her sister in law. I think they’re just both humans with mainly good intentions who’ve lead very different lives.
Bella, there is so much that is insulting to women in your post, I don’t know where to start! Heels are an artificial enhancement, done to make others insignificant? And poor Widdle Meghan needed Kate to make sure she could see and have fun?
That’s just for starters! Wow.
@Betty – some women do seem to relish wearing heels to make others feel small. I have no doubt men would do the same if that were an option.
I used to think being tall was a curse. I never had a petite tiny day in my life and it used to bother me as a child. It took me time to learn to own my height and then it became a blessing. Even if I am always asked to reach things in markets. lol
Kate did try to overshadow everyone else. Truthfully she is not 6 feet tall and she does do this and she did it at Pippa’s wedding. I don’t know why she does it.
Because I am tall I am aware of this and when I take photos with shorter people I will take off my shoes or bend my knees. I own my height but at the same time, I know it can intimidate other people and make them feel awkward. So I only play it up when I actually want someone to feel awkward. Like a-hole men who annoy me with their sexism and skeevy behavior.
I recall when some laughed at Chris Martin hunching when he performed at the Super Bowl with Beyonce and Bruno Mars but I understood it. I just think it is polite. Kate should always stand tall and be ok with being a tall woman but I think at Trooping the hat was the overkill and made it seem too much.
People are going to maximize their assets. I have no issue with this. It would make no sense for a tall person not to use their height as an advantage (I say this as a shortie).
If I were to get agitated at every person who dared to be taller than me and, well, look it, I’d have to be agitated at 90 percent of the world’s population. That’s way too exhausting.
@BELLA DUPONT I agree with your comments. Kate may be just chilling in her ivory tower, loving her life, or she may be stressing out because of perceived competition. Either way, the speculation is entertaining.
LOL that bateau neckline is the summer trend this year. Every store from cheap to couture have some kind of off-shoulder look in their clothes. Who cares who wore it first. Queen Letizia and many royals have worn off-shoulder looks for years…are Meghan and Kate copying them?
Don’t know about being forgotten. It will be hard to forget Kate and just how expensive it is to support her lifestyle. Seriously speaking, though, she’s the future Queen Consort and mother of the future King. She’ll forever be in the top spotlight. No need to be insecure and petty because in the long run, and barring abolition/stripping of titles//stepping down, it’s her and William’s descendants who will continue the monarchy, not Meghan and Harry’s. She should think long-term and not treat everything as competition.
Look at that balcony appearance last Sunday and tell me where Margaret’s family was? Yes, they were there as extended family but the focus was on Elizabeth and her family. That will be the case with the Cambridges and Sussexes.
We all know that the Cambridge’s will rule but right now, Waity Kate can’t see anything but competition and being overlooked by Meghan’s threat. Let the war begin! Lol!!
The coverage will be dictated by the public’s interest. If W&K go back to hiding the kids away and people only getting to see them a few times a year, the interest will wane — and clearly Kate knows this.
There was more international interest in H&M’s wedding than there was in W&K’s. The screams from the crowd on Saturday were the loudest for H&M. There were more journalists there for Trooping than usual.
These are all just facts. Publications want to make money so they will follow the public’s interest and print what people want to see, regardless of their “place in the monarchy.” The survival of the monarchy depends on this.
ETA @LAK: The Wisteria sisters name was supposed to be complimentary? How? By definition it is snarky when applied to Kate & Pippa. I believe you but that is too funny.
Uhm, nope, the coverage of the W&K’s wedding was much bigger because he’s the future king but if you think otherwise or want Meghan to be the biggest star than.. good luck. I totally agree with Rainbow.
Lorelai: I think that was Tatler’s weak attempt at witty, 1920s bright young things description of the Middletons.
They really didn’t think of the negatives of Wisteria, and that the negatives were such a bullseye.
King Edward VII was married and no one remembers her name, I bet she never put a foot wrong. However Diana was never Queen we are not likely to forget her anytime soon.
This article read like the patriachy fighting back and reminding MM to chill but she can’t help the fact that she connect with working women more.
The survival of the monarchy depends on the conservative, traditional supporters and there are plenty of these people in the UK. International coverage/interest/gossip means absolutely nothing. People like seeing stability and W&K with their lovely family are the epitome of traditional. This is why I don’t think Meghan breathing fresh air into the very traditional monarchy is going to do anything. This is what Meghan has married into, she’s not changing an institution lol. I mean, she can try to be progressive/be political, but it will backfire, imo. I think it was Diana’s ex-secretary? who wrote a piece a short while ago which said she needs to tread carefully or something along those lines. Will and Kate’s wedding was more popular here, where it matters the most.
Lorelei – I’d like to see the numbers about international coverage because America doesn’t equal the rest of the world. And in the UK, where it matters most, Harry and Meghan’s wedding drew in numbers way, way below William and Kate’s.
And no, the survival of the monarchy doesn’t and has never depended on who gets photographed more or gets more coverage in the media. That’s just silly. Queen Victoria was in self-imposed exile and the monarchy didn’t die. The Duke of Windsor created so much media hoopla around him and Wallis and his abdication, yet the monarchy survived. Diana had the opposite: she had so much press coverage AND damaged the monarchy even when she was no longer part of it.
You know what creates and drives the monarchy’s future? Heirs. And Kate has three. The monarchy does not even need Harry and Meghan that much in order to survive and continue. No amount of media coverage around Meghan will change the fact that George Cambridge is the future, and Harry and Meghan and their kids will always be supporting players.
I don’t know. I think the numbers are probably much closer than reported. The ratings are only for tv viewers. But so many people stream live tv now as opposed to when W&K got married. A lot of people don’t even have TVs anymore. I bet if you were to account for the online viewers, about the same numbers watched H&Ms wedding, maybe even more.
Higher in the US and Australia (so far).
“Early projections had estimated that more than three billion people would watch Harry and Meghan’s wedding across the world, compared to the two billion who watched the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge marry at Westminster Abbey. Keep in mind that these numbers, provided by Harper’s Bazaar, include TV and Internet view estimates.
However, Telegraph reported a few hours after the Meghan and Harry’s wedding that an estimated 1.9 billion watched the royal wedding on May 19. This would be roughly equal to the 2 billion estimates for Kate and Willam that Harper’s Bazaar provided, including TV and Internet and in-person.
However, some people doubt the two billion estimate for William and Kate’s wedding. Deadline reported that the largest ever global audience for a TV event was 1 billion in 2008 for the Olympic games in Beijing. It was doubtful that 1/3 of the world’s population at the time watched the royal wedding, skeptics said at the time.
But now that skepticism is going to be put to the test. It’s not outside the realm of possibility that Meghan and Prince Harry’s wedding will have the greatest views and ratings yet, considering how many more people have access to the Internet and are using social media now than even as recently as 2011.”
https://heavy.com/entertainment/2018/05/royal-wedding-ratings-viewers-comparisons/
If you don’t think interest & media coverage matters, I don’t know what to tell you.
That week before and After the wedding MM was searched 9 & 8 billion times worldwide. The person searched more this year is steve hawkins the day he died. 10 billion.
Like them or not they are more popular. Harry has been more popular before MM ever came along. Since America is the biggest media market and probably the most important one for celebrity=revenue and global reach then it matters. MM’s American birth will endear her to Americans naturally. We are more interested in her. Just as the Italians would be if she were Italian.
They are global and the ones that sell the papers will be pushed by the media.
I think you guys are forgetting one big thing… the American media interest in Meghan and Harry means zilch.
If Kate is indeed “upping her game” and doing more, is that not a good thing?
Exactly! If she works harder and show up more, it’s because she’s jealous of MM. If she doesn’t work, she’s lazy. She can’t win. Oh and I doubt she cares…her place is secure whether she does jack. Why are we just ragging on the women here…how about LAZY Will and Harry? How will their numbers be this year???
Ha, well said!
It is!, and I will forever credit Meghan if this is what is what lights a fire under Lazy Willy’s bum.
I don’t think this means Will or Kate will work more.
Well it only took 7 years. I had to laugh at this line though, “As elegant and chic as Kate looked, her £39.99 Zara dress will be much more affordable to the average British woman than Meghan’s high-end fashion choices.” Kate routinely wears high end designer labels, & no doubt her custom McQueen cost more than Meghan’s Carolina Herrera on Saturday, but sure let’s compare the cost of a sundress and a wedding gown to make this narrative work.
A lot of tabloids are clearly trying to slot Meghan into the “rebel” Fergie role, only difference is they can’t body shame her like they did Fergie.
I don’t think Kate cares that much about Meghan being the centre of attention.
@ MCV
All evidence to the contrary (so far)
What evidence? I’m not a Kate fan but I just don’t see it really.
I agree. Also when Kate and Wills married, HE was the one that didn’t want to work therefore she didn’t either. Only after the DoE gave his retirement notice did they agree to move back to London. I don’t think Kate is confident working but if Will wanted to be a full time royal when they got married she would support him and step up. I think they’re showing they’re more serious now because they took on better staff for Kate who is giving better guidance. Harry was already in that step up to fill Phils shoes upon marriage and MM will be supporting him and jump right in.
I’ve said on here many times, the Princes married women who reflect who they are as men. Harry wanted someone who challenged him, William did not. William wanted a doormat he could treat like crap, Harry did not.
People forget Katie Keen’s behaviour before she was married, the stories of bullish behaviour to any women who dared even to look at William. Kate has always been competitive with other women, in fact she’s been cosplaying Jecca Craig for years. She and her family even planted stories in the Fail that Jecca was Will’s Camilla.
Why would anyone plant stories that their husband’s great love was someone else?!
That part confuses me too,
I’m not saying it’s not possible, but I would want the world believing that the man I married wants me and I’m his first choice. I can believe someone else leaked that certain narrative, but why would the wife or her family want to?
That story was planted when Kate went to Mustique with George (billed as G’s first family holiday) and simultaneously William was papped at an airport in Spain with a group of people going hunting that same time frame. Jecca was the only woman in the group.
First the media was outraged that William, about to launch his anti-hunting conservation conference that same week, was on a hunting trip. Many articles on the theme ensued. No one paid attention to the woman in the photo.
A day later, Middleton surrogate ( with trusted Middleton sources at the time) retweeted the picture with the caption ‘William’s Camilla’ and all the journalists went crazy trying to get him to give an outright statement about Jecca.
Since then, the media covers her in a way that implies something eg The telegraph described William at her wedding as distressed that she was marrying someone else (paraphrasing)!!!
Because William would not like to be compared to his father or to have Jecca compared to Camilla?
I suppose it’s possible the aim was to embarrass Will with a Jecca = Camilla story and hope that QEII would have a stern word with him (as if she ever does.) I don’t necessarily buy the Midds planted that story but I do think they have planted plenty of stories. I think they leaked the story about Pippa’s hen party that happened the same weekend Will was caught dad-dancing with young blondes. For days the assumption was poor Kate was left at home with the babies. I guess a “pitiful Kate” wasn’t the desired portrayal. But having the story about Kate’s weekend party come out just proved both W&K were willing to leave their children to party and neither cared about the CW event that weekend.
William leaving KM to meet the Queen alone at Peter and Autumn’s wedding. He went to Jecca’s brother’s wedding instead, and personally introducing Kate to HM wasn’t important to him.
“I can’t work I have to be a hands-on father” William going to Jecca’s wedding party in Kenya instead of being there for his daughter’s first Easter. Loads of stories leaked about the Easter Kate was planning for the kids.
Whatever Jecca is to him, she ranks above everyone else. Everyone. And Carole knows it.
Lizbeth: In the early days, the Middletons leaked all the time. It was so transparent that journalists took to simply reacting to the Middleton surrogate as far as checking stories with him.
After Charlotte was born, they were fewer leaked WK centred stories, and that Middleton surrogate was frozen out amidst threats of litigation between the Cambridges and him. He keeps hinting that he will tell all one day.
Until Pippa’s hen weekend, we hadn’t seen much leaking that centred around Kate.
I have always found it odd that he skipped his cousin’s wedding to go to a wedding of the brother of a rumoured girlfriend. And leaving Kate to meet the Queen on her own for the first time. Just another sign of how he has treated Kate like dirt throughout the years.
Any thoughts on how Dacre stepping down from the DM affects the Middleton connection?
Re: Dacre’s resignation, he’s probably groomed someone else to handle that “accountant”. This tweet from DM Reporter reflects how much some people *will not* miss him. https://twitter.com/DMReporter/status/1004431810695180294
Nic919: No change. The incoming editor is also good friends with the Middletons. He was their first media advisor.
The person who made the comment that Jecca was William’s Camilla was a a paparazzo named Niraj Tanna and he made the comment in a tweet.
Harry and William always hated Tanna, my theory is that they hate Tanna because he took pictures of Harry with other women when he was dating Chelsy and also because it is easier to hate an independent pap than a pap affiliated with a major media organization. Kate and the Middletons did not have the same antipathy towards Tanna as William and Harry and some assert that the Middletons or someone close to them would tip Tanna off when they were out and about. Whatever the tie-in between the Middletons and Tanna, it’s fallen by the wayside given that Kate, along with William, sicc-ed their lawyers on Tanna in 2014 accusing him of harassing George and Nanny Maria.
Personally I think the comment was Tanna expressing his opinion and his opinion alone, and that it would a bone-headed move on the part of the Middletons to make such a statement either directly or through a surrogate.
Can someone more media savvy advice please:
Is it possible there’s a correlation between the Middleton’s reported close relationships with senior elements within the DM and their vicious handling of Meghan Markle?
Does anyone know?
“Is it possible there’s a correlation between the Middleton’s reported close relationships with senior elements within the DM and their vicious handling of Meghan Markle?”
I can believe the Middletons have leaked about other things, but I don’t think they found the dad and told him to go talk to TMZ or told the brother to write the letter to not marry Harry.. I don’t think they’re in contact with the sister either. Some of the vicious handling has come from her own family. With family like that, who needs enemies?
Tanna is the pap William, Kate, and the Middletons have alternately used and abused through the years. Need to deflect Uncle Gary’s sting? Get W&K to have their first public kiss right where Tanna can catch it. Kate playing tennis on Duchy property in cold weather? Middletons brought Tanna a blanket and snacks while he’s taking pics, protest later with a lawsuit when William pitches a fit about it.
Tanna knows where the bodies are buried.
Bella DuPont: Some things are just miraculous gifts. The crazy, shitty Markle relatives willing to sing like canaries were miraculous gifts to the tabloids. The Middletons didn’t heed to lift a finger.
There is a story on the DM right now about the French press revisiting W&K’s nude picture lawsuit. According to the French, Meghan’s topless pics while working are no different than Kate topless pics, and they shouldn’t have been sued for it.
@Perplexed:
I have absolutely not a shred of doubt in my mind that Mr Markle was set up. Not just by his vile daughter and the Mexican paparazzi, I believe the Daily Mail were in on it from the very beginning.
They say they obtained the cctv footage of Mr Markle after the fact, I call bullshit on that. Everything was set up to make sure there was no doubt in anybody’s mind that they had his cooperation.
Furthermore, I believe that a good 50% (at least of the comments on that site are commercially driven….ie most of those trolls are PAID. Maybe by the hour, maybe by the number of nasty comments. I don’t know.
What I do know is that the DM has a clear and carefully executed agenda wrt Meghan and there is s lot of cash driving it.
Bella DuPont: Ever since the *Leveson enquiry, the press has been trying to behave better to ward off any parliamentary laws curbing press freedom. And Harry has taken advantage of this skittish mood. Part of a leaked letter sent to the IPSO in 2016 includes a threat to throw his (royal) weight behind parliamentary efforts on that front.
*https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leveson_Inquiry
Since he started dating Meghan, he has sent more threatening / complaints to the IPSO than other royals which is why there have been no leaked photos or articles of their courtship. Anything you saw, including from Toronto or Botswana, was approved.
It all came to boiling point the fortnight before the wedding when Parliament had another vote on curbing press freedom. They lost. That same week, the IPSO received 2 more missives from Harry, one of which specifically mentioned Thomas Markle. (Reporters confirmed via twitter)
The DM responded to the missive by outing Thomas Markle to teach Harry a lesson. And if you paid attention, all the UK media were cheering the DM on. One reporter tweeted a comment along the lines that if the media were being accused of stalking Thomas, they would show that it was actually collusion.
Outside of the usual heir vs Spare media biases, i think Harry is handling the media really badly in relation to Meghan, and it’s causing more negative fallout for her. I couldn’t believe it when Arthur Edwards was widely quoted in an article for the NY times about Harry’s failing media relationship.
Arthur Edwards is one of those royal press photographers who loves the royals especially Harry. He has photographed them for decades and developed a good (he thought) relationship with them.
“What I do know is that the DM has a clear and carefully executed agenda wrt Meghan and there is s lot of cash driving it.”
They make a lot of money off of bizarre stories, so, yes I can believe there’s a financially-motivated agenda. Anything that makes a media company money is how they’re going to play their cards, not ethics.
It’s just unfortunate for Meghan that her family is willing to sell her out so easily. Of course, we think all of her family stinks and are horrible people and think less of them, not her, so hopefully there’s consolation for her in that.
@ LAK
Meghan’s fathers stupidity is still a fairly recent development. Long before he came on the scene, or long before even the siblings showed us just how vile they were, the DM already had a full blown attack engine primed and working against her specifically. Remember the “gang scarred” narrative? Or the DM attacks on her mother and on her career?
While I understand your point re Harry’s handling of things, I reckon it would have made very little difference towards changing their narrative.
Her trashy family was just an extra gift. They already had a wrecking ball directed at her long before the gift.
Bella Dupont: The staged photos were as long ago as February not just the month before the wedding.
My point was that UK media was looking for an opportunity to attack Harry. They can’t do it directly at the moment, so they used one of the protected relatives against Harry.
It was clear that the Markles sans Senior were not protected. Meghan told her lawyers that she didn’t know them. The media does that with everybody who becomes famous. If they can persuade bitter betty relations, friends, etc to give negative stories, they do. They point out every salacious story they can cobble together. Meghan is not special in that regard. Perhaps you are simply used to well behaved media rather than our unruly media.
As for the pre-loaded gun, i’m not sure when you started paying attention to Harry’s romantic life, but the media has attacked every single one of his girlfriends and their parents. Chelsy’s father was practically Mugabe’s Henchman whilst Cressida’s mother was a good time girl 😉 who slept with so many people she ended up with 4 ex-husbands.
It matters not a jot if he had found some blonde British girl to marry. She would have been attacked. That’s the way it works.
People were more sensitive about Meghan because they went after her race, but even if she had been a white girl they would still have attacked her.
I’ve always been confused by the notion that Jecca was “William’s great love”. Maybe I’m getting the timeline mixed up, but Kate is the one he has been with for literally years, even before getting married. If he had suddenly dumped Kate and then married someone else, I could see where Kate would be the one to fall into the “his great love” category. But when did Will date Jecca and for how long? And why is she always labeled as the one who got away? It makes very little sense to me.
He and Kate were on and off more times than a light switch. She was his ‘go to girl’ when he was in between flings or just wanted a shag. the story is he wanted a relationship but she didn’t but they remained great friends. He treats her (Jecca) with more respect than he does his wife and mother of his children.
@L84Tea,
William was in Kenya for a few months during his pre-university gap year, that is when he and Jecca supposedly dated and got “pretend” engaged. The story about their relationship actually broke while William was attending St. Andrews at which time both Jecca and William were with other people, although I don’t think that William’s relationship with Kate was common knowledge. Clarence House in an unusual move issued a statement denying that William and Jecca were involved.
William does have a close relationship with Jecca and her family as evidenced by his trekking to Kenya to attend Jecca and her brother’s respective weddings.
Jecca and the Craig family were his retreat after Diana died. Whatever Jecca is or has been to William through the years, he puts her above everyone else.
To be honest it’s a juicy story, but I think we’re over exaggerating this. We have no idea how William treats Jecca and from the leaked conversations between K&W he was very warm which surprised me.
According to wikipedia Jecca Craig is a ph.d student. Lol she is way out of William’s lead imo. Sort of like Brad Pitt and that Harvard prof the press were trying to make happen.
Would William ever be interested in a Phd student? Huh. That makes me question the whole narrative now of the emphasis on her as William’s Camilla. Charles wanted someone who would be there to nurture him, and I can’t picture a Phd student having the time to do that for William.
If it’s true William wants someone who has at his beck and call, I really can’t picture a Phd student having the time for all that.
Perplexed: True.
The flipside is that Jecca is the one that makes William take some responsibility for his platform. He didn’t start advocating for conservation, and Rhinos specifically, until a Rhino was killed on Jecca’s family park.
Her conservation organisation is one of very few organisations that he attends. Frequently and consistently. Even where the meetings are abroad.
It’s horrible to say this because Kate is clearly someone who takes care of him, but Jecca seems to be the one who matters, romantic relationship or not.
The one to whom he extended protection when media made up lies about them. The one he visits on the regular around the anniversary of Diana’s death.
Jecca was william’s first girlfriend. Maybe he lost it to her. You never forget your first !
If Harry & Meghan’s relationship has taught us anything is not to believe everything you read. All these rumors & innuendos are just that. If we are to believe all the things we’ve read on blogs, tumblr & papers about W&K relationship, then should we also believe every good & bad thing that is written about H&M relationship?
All these things are just hearsay and not based on facts.
Absolutely not. Harry and MM are perfect in every single way! LMAO.
Unfortunately, some commenters who don’t like Meghan–especially those who repeat lies (she abandoned one dog and the other has died like 10 times already; oh, and she was an escort) and innuendo, do believe every bad thing written about her and they seem to want others to believe it as well as. IMO, they behave like hive minds, wanting everyone else to hate her as much as they do. Mostly, their venomous comments lack intelligence or logic, and therein lies the difference in the type of criticism H&M get versus W&K. Also, don’t confuse the dislike these people express towards H&M; they don’t actually dislike Harry; they dislike Meghan with Harry.
I don’t believe anything I read about either couple. Whether it’s in this comment section or in Vanity Fair. It’s all speculation and people get things wrong and frequently make things up–including the professionals.
@Olenna “…those who repeat lies (she abandoned one dog and the other has died like 10 times already)”
Next we’ll be hearing the dog we’ve seen is not really her dog, it just looks like her dog but after an expensive search for match, a new dog was brought in to substitute for her 10 x dead dog 😉
Olenna, your comment clearly shows your bias for H&M. Bad Stories about them are always false as compared to bad stories about William and Kate are always true! Just in saying that, you showed how ridiculous the argument is!! LOL!
And Vinot, Kate is drunk, taking Xanax and messing with mood stabilizers??? Good God, why would you make up such vile lies????
@Lizabeth,
I don’t think we’ve seen the last of the stories, either. So glad she only had 2 pets!
@Betty,
You comment is the epitome of the pot and kettle idiom, with your bias for KM practically shouting at me! LOL! Benefit of the doubt here–you comprehended what I wrote but decided blanket statements and distortions gave your bias more weight. That’s OK, ’cause it appears to me you are arguing with yourself and proving my point while doing it. Carry on.
IMO Harry was going to fall truly, madly, deeply with any f***able woman who would take him on as a person and also willing to be part of The
CircusFirm.Meghan has good qualities but to my eyes she has neither challenged Harry nor The Firm, rather she has fallen neatly in line. Let’s see, she gave up her clothing line, shut down her blog, stopped posting on social media and stopped doing media for her TV show despite being one of the most active promoters of the show, this happened months before the engagement announcement.
I think that Harry and The Firm are fortunate that Meghan has qualities that go well the role of royal Duchess, even better that she has qualities that the other royal Duchess of her generation struggles with like making speeches and has impressively hit the ground running, but Meghan has not, and I suspect will not, challenge Harry or the Firm.
Three weeks she’s been part of that family, three. How about you let her take a breath before she starts dismantling 1000 years of British rule?
I am responding to the comment, the Princes married women who reflect who they are as men. Harry wanted someone who challenged him, William did not. William wanted a doormat he could treat like crap, Harry did not.
Meghan does not need to get her breath before she starts dismantling ‘1000 years of British rule’ because Meghan is not going to take on that role. She knows it, Harry knows it and The Firm knows it, and if there was the least little inkling that she had such an aspiration, then May 19, 2018 would have been just another lovely Saturday with the most noteworthy event in Britain being a sports match.
I think that Meghan is going to do well in her role as The Duchess of Sussex but she is not going to challenge any BRF individual let alone dismantle the institution.
I’m not entirely sure that it is necessary for her to “challenge” the royal family at all. I would like to see her and Harry getting out there and promoting their charities and inspiring people like Diana did, without all the drama and dysfunction. I like that Meghan seems to genuinely care for people and is excited about the work the royal family do. William and Catherine while nice people I am sure have really not suceeded in doing this. They really do seem like reluctant royals who don’t have much passion for philanthropy or much else. That passion and enthusiasm is what is lacking in the firm right now imo and why Harry and Meghan are catching our attention.
@aaa – Meghan knows that her passion for work targeted at the disadvantaged will fit well with her new role. I believe she “found” herself in her love for Harry and the advantageous position she knew she would be in to influence, add to and enhance the charitable work that Harry is currently involved in as well as the work she values. Sometimes a chance encounter with someone leads to love and opens up a whole new world of opportunity, and I think she finds this whole new world a lot more satisfying than being an actress. Give the woman a break, I think Harry made a great choice and they’ll do great things together.
I’m guilty of comparing them myself but this article is absurd. Frankly I believe each is totally different. Meghan will enjoy the limelight more than Kate. We see Kate glowing when she’s informal, with kids. Here she looks her best.
I honestly believe Kate might be sending a message to the public: “I’m a mother, love my kids and that’s who I am and what defines me most”. That’s totally fine with my. And from the looks of it very honest. What do you guys think? 🙂
I agree. The comments on this site are usually against Kate for how little she works, how she uses her kids to get out of work. This may be true. Or maybe she wants to be a mother to her three young children and feels most comfortable doing that? She looks so youthful and gorgeous in the polo match pictures. She looks old, tired, and matronly at Trooping. It’s hard not to compare the two women but can’t we like both of them? Want to see both succeed? Men have been pitting women against each other for generations, to their benefit. Why do we women have to help them out by doing the same. These Kate v. Meghan articles in the DM will likely continue but maybe we the public don’t have to fall into that trap.
Here here!
“Or maybe she wants to be a mother to her three young children and feels most comfortable doing that?”
Then she and William can buy their own home, pay for their own nannies, and pay for their own security. Get off the dole and they are welcome to live however they want.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be a full time mom, the problem people have is that Kate went into her marriage knowing that it came with a lifelong taxpayer funded salary, and she doesn’t seem to have much interest in doing the bare minimum to earn it, but she’s definitely interested in having brand new bespoke outfits on the few occasions that she does go to work. Royals are barely even asked to work 15 hours a week, and yet still it’s like her & William are being asked to totally abandon their kids to work 80 hours a week. All of Europe’s other royal families have senior members with young families, and somehow they manage to put in a fair amount of “work.”
L84Tea: You mean “Hear, Hear”?
All other royal women have managed to be moms and do royal work. Kate is the outlier. Anne puts in how many engagements per year and yet would we suggest that Zara and Peter turned out horribly? Similar to Sophie with Louise and James. This belief that mothers cannot step out a few hours here and there without horribly damaging their children’s psyche is horribly regressive and has been proven false time and time again. And with all this time off and “leaves” they don’t in exchange reduce their expenses accordingly.
“Or maybe she wants to be a mother to her three young children and feels most comfortable doing that?”
What is your her excuse for her in the 7 years before she became a mother?
And yet, Nic919, WHY are Anne’s kids so great? They BOTH live on her estate (home/security paid for by the taxpayer…from Mom, of course, but where does SHE get it from?? Hmmmm… 🙄), Peter’s “job” is getting commissions from Granny (no competing bids to getting the job: overcharging charities for block parties anyone?), monies from Anne help support her kids. Why is THAT ok with you? YOU are supporting them as well… crickets…crickets…. No outcry there! Yes, they are not “working royals”, yet, there they are, benefiting from your tax dollars!
They are all mooching off the system. I am not a monarchist. But Kate just happens to be the one getting the most from the taxpayers and doing the least while pretending she is supermom. It is offensive that she and William are implying that mothers who work are bad mothers. It is also offensive that they receive full time senior royal perks while not doing full time hours. The whole system is archaic and sketchy but within the context of doing royal “work” which is the justification for all the taxpayer money to renovate KP twice, use the helicopter and security at all times and at her parents place, she is not holding up her end of the bargain.
Of course the monarchy system is unfair. But in terms of royal children (AND non-royal children) turning out fine when their parents work, the criticism of Anne’s children voiced here by @Jan90067 seems to be based mostly on their career choices and financial dependence, not their emotional well-being (which so far as I know seems fine.) While one certainly can criticize them for that reason (although I expect Zara had to work hard on her equestrian skills), I thought the need to nurture her children’s emotional stability was the main reason cited for Kate not to do what many see as her fair share of royal work! Whether Kate stays home or suddenly busts her __ working an astonishing 15 hrs most weeks, do we really think any of her children will be different from Anne’s & grow up to have strong independent careers, capable of earning their own money and eager to do it? (George prior to the throne, the other two forever) I doubt it. And if they are to develop in that way, a mom who stays home alot but doesn’t do the usual “home” work of a SAHM, and a dad whose seething resentment of his (royal) work is impossible to hide, probably won’t engender strong work ethics in their children. QEII has been criticized for leaving Charles and Anne when they were young (not the Malta Big Lie, the work when her father was ill) but whether you like them or not, both Charles and Anne are hard workers within the system. Both have made real contributions IMO as has Sophie.
With Meghan around people are looking out for Kate more. She’s been around forever. She’s been photographed thousands of times in numerous outfits. Now we’re just reading into it more because of Meghan. I honestly don’t see Kate doing anything different. She’s always been beautiful and she’s always most comfortable with her kids.
Right? And a number of people here are making it sound like she’s getting papped as frequently as Pippa when it’s been, what? Three times? At the train station, driving to pick up George from school… I don’t know that it was a pap that caught her, Maria, Louis, and Charlotte in the park, but it was definitely a civilian who photographed her in the grocery store.
Kate probably gets papped all the time but the photos are rarely published. When they are, the papers either do so to embarrass (Kate shopping on her big blogging day) or because the pictures were allowed to be published by the royals -and both W&K and H&M do this.
Lexa: Kate is papped all the time. Or twitter spotted. By professionals and by the public. Ditto other royals. It’s not about her (and other royals) ability or inability to be papped.
Tumblr and various royal blogs have many images and sometimes video of all the royals at play.
It’s whether the pictures (and video) are ran in mainstream media. With very rare exceptions, they are ran with permission from the royals. The current default position is not to publish without express permission from the royals unless the media has alot more to gain from the fallout of thwarting the royals eg outing Thomas Markle’s pap set ups.
Any time pictures (and video) are published without a murmur from the Palace, it’s sanctioned. And there is usually an agenda attached. Much the same way as celebrities.
Professional or amateur photographer is not the point at all.
@LAK I’m going to have to disagree here, mostly because I follow a number of twitter, Instagram, and Tumblr royal watcher accounts that routinely post the paparazzi photos or photos taken by bystanders (including scans of the foreign publications that’ll post shots unseen in the UK). There are not that many, especially compared to the old days. It’s fair to say that the BRF has a lot of these photos killed or buys them before they ever see the light of day, but it’s not an every day or even an every week occurrence that we’re seeing her out and about. I’m taking issue with the exaggeration, even though I’m happy to criticize the inconsistency of what photos are allowed to be published and the narrative(s) KP tries to use them for.
Lexa: You’ve missed my point entirely. With rare exceptions, no pictures appear in mainstream media without the express permission of the royals. And that permission is granted because an agenda is being pushed.
The point isn’t who took the pictures, be they amateur or professional. If the royals like the pictures, and they fit an agenda they are pushing, then permission is given.
Pictures (and sometimes video) appear on the internet all the time. They are posted by specialist blogs rather than going viral. They very rarely make it to MSM even where that msm is on the internet because permission hasn’t been given OR it isn’t worth the trouble to post. Unless it’s an ergregious picture eg those naked photos of Kate in France, the Palace simply ignores them, and they don’t go viral. That goes for the reporters with social media.
I’m sure it is difficult for Kate. She’s had the spotlight and Will and Harry to herself for 7 years. It doesn’t have to be some big drama but I’m sure it’s an adjustment for her. I would like to see the royals mix it up-have Kate and Meghan do events together or Anne and Kate, Sophie and Meghan, Will and Meghan, Kate and Charles, etc.
Yep Been doing the best she can (have said before that Will is probably a petulant, big baby and thus a full-time job in itself) and along comes Meghan and now she has to suffer all the comparisons. I will say one thing, Will was selfish on many levels distancing himself from Prince Charles. Charles clearly really likes Meghan and has an opportunity with Harry and her to really be part of their lives. The person who has been iced out in this equation is Kate, not William.
Mark my words, we will soon see willie sucking up to Chuckles. I suspect it will be when M & H have their own family and include Cam and Chuck all the time. Willie is vain and petty (he is his father’s son afterall) and won’t like to be out in the cold.
I look their throwback looks to the TV show “Dynasty” they look like Crystal and Alexis Carrington
I’m not sure if wearing taller hats is “upping her game” Lol
It’s more a matter of attention seeking than upping her game.
Yeah I don’t think we have ever seen Kate wear a hat that tall. that’s a REALLY tall hat. Interesting that she wore it when she was going to be standing with Meghan.
Like I said yesterday, I don’t think any one of these incidents is evidence that Kate is “threatened” by Meghan or whatever. Kate’s position in the RF is secure and clearly “higher” than Meghan’s. But when you look at the past few months, there is a clear pattern that emerges that is interesting in terms of Kate’s appearances, appearances with the children, etc.
Kate’s position is ‘secure’ in the sense that she’ll never be cast out into the street and everyone will need to curtsy to her. If that’s all she wants then no need to feel competitive if someone else is praised and loved for working hard and connecting with the public, right?
(Lol at ‘that’s a REALLY tall hat’!)
Agenbiter, her position is secure only as long as William wants her around. See Diana and Fergie.
Good point, @nash
@notasuagrhere, you sound like you’re waiting for William to divorce Kate! No matter what goes on behind closed doors (we have no idea if William messes around), they aren’t splitting up anytime soon.
I read on DM that the lawyers for Closer magazine are appealing the 90k that was awarded the Cambridges for publishing the topless photo of Kate. It’s very confusing to me that they are using Meghan’s Hamburger grilling video she did for Men’s Health magazine in 2013 as basis for their argument that Royals dont mind their members stripping when it benefits them. They want the amount to be brought down to 100 pounds. What do the cases have to do with each other?
Having these pictures back in the news at the time of MM’s trip with HM is a reasonable explanation for the tense(r) mood of the newlyweds at the Trooping of the Colour.
Wow, they’re using her grilling video?! That’s quite bad. Kate was on private property, sunbathing topless, just like many others do. There was an expectation of privacy. Obviously, they didn’t think a skeevy pap would be taking their pics from miles away!
Meghan’s video is something which she chose to do for money or whatever hardly comparable.
I have the feeling that the royal experts are the first to feel uncomfortable with Meghan because she’s American, an actress and biracial. They just can not accept that she is well integrated into the RF. There are at least two think pieces on Meghan per day.
Meghan made a lot of royalists uncomfortable. And I agree with you about the think pieces. We’ve only seen Meghan once since the wedding, but people have written thousands of articles about her in the past four weeks!
Kate has been around 7 years, Meghan only 6 months. She is still on her honeymoon with the press, and we have yet to see if she hits the ground running. I dislike comparing the two women as they are totally different, and the idea that every single appearance by Kate is a game of competition with Meghan seems absurd to me.
I laugh at the calling it a honeymoon. Meghan has had racist articles, golddigger articles, slut shaming articles etc all written about her. Some honeymoon. 🙄
Yep. So far I believe that she has risen above it with aplomb but it can’t be easy for her.
Meghan is ripped constantly in the media. Almost every article is about her past or how “inappropriate” she is. I’m still waiting on her honeymoon period.
yeah i agree, also to add… kate has generally worn high street on non formal days, on the day after her wedding she wore a zara dress, shes worn topshop before etc. That polo thing she usually wears jeans and a casual top, but its been unseasonably hot this year so she wore a breezy dress i guess. Its irrational that people are reading so much into everything. I bet she gets on fine with Meghan, and she will pick up more work when her kids get older.
Personally, im hoping for the entire monarchy to go after TQ dies, im an Irish person who lives in NI, so my taxpayer money goes to towards this, and i fundamentally disagree
with institutional monarchy (regardless of who is on the throne, or who they married).
“she will pick up more work when her kids get older.”
She has never shown a work ethic in her life, other than clinging to William. What on earth makes you think she will change in the future?
All of the other royal mothers managed to have little kids and work far more. Why is it her big defenders keep treating Kate Middleton like a child?
And to go along with Nota, why do her defenders keep acting like her working more means she would never be around her kids?
First, that’s insulting to moms who work outside the home.
Second, she is perfectly capable of doing three events a week between the hours of 9 and 2 or whatever while the kids are in school. Or do one evening event a week (or two a month). She’s not juggling daycare or hiring babysitters or a work schedule with cleaning, errands, etc.
I just don’t understand the narrative that Kate can’t work more because she has small children. She doesn’t WANT to work more. And apparently the royal family is fine with that, but that needs to be the wording. It’s not that she can’t. Its that she wont.
@Becks1- I agree Kate could easily work more without any negative effect on her children (might even have some positive modeling effects) but as you say, she just doesn’t want to. (And she works so little that adding an event a week would be a noticeable increase.) But I’m not sure the royal family is fine with her lack of work. I know people always say if the Queen wanted Will and/or Kate to work more she’d tell them so. But would she? And would they listen? I know the Queen feels she has a duty to work until she drops. Some agree with that view, some don’t and think she should retire. But I think it IS her view. But does she also think her elderly cousins have a duty to “die with their boots on” too? Not to mention her senior citizen, never-gonna- inherit-the-throne daughter? But not her almost middle-aged 2nd in line for the throne grandson and his wife? (I know Will’s been doing more but only very recently)
@Lizabeth that’s a good point. I do think it bothers the queen. And its not like they can literally force Kate into working more. but I figure if it really bothered them all THAT much we would probably see more signs of it? My guess is Sophie and Anne just roll their eyes at Kate as they head off to 5 engagements in a day or whatever.
But maybe its the kind of situation where Kate just does what Kate wants to do and the royal family is disgusted with her.
I dont literally mean she’ll pick up more work, like shifts in a bar, she’ll just naturally get more charities or whatever.
Can i also just say, however many engagements they do or do not do is meaningless to me. Their work helps very little people, even all those garden parties etc is mainly royal family Pr. Its a nonsense job, so do 500 engagements a year, or 5… still mostly nonsense.
I will go as far to say Kate and Willie not working are bad role models for their children.
I thought Kate looked a lot like her mother Carole when she exited the church after Harry’s wedding.
I don’t think Kate feels much pressure from any source right now…but she sure will after the death of HM. Duties will increase and by then MM will likely be quite busy raising children with Harry. The focus will shift much more on the Cambridges.
I can’t see Meghan at home to take care of her children. I don’t even think it’s what she wants.
Omg the daily mail website is hard to read. So many videos!!!!!
Anyway, I think his point about children was interesting. It is one area where Kate “beats” Meghan or “outshines her” or whatever. We criticize Kate here for things like her extended maternity leave, but many praise her for it and it feeds into her image of being a mom first, duchess second. (which is probably how she views herself.) Not everyone woman views themselves that way (I’m not sure I view myself as a mom above all else) and if Meghan cant project the same image, there will be criticism for it for sure. Meghan is going to be in a tight spot when it comes to kids.
Kate chased, pursued, hounded put up with, and clung to the wrong man for a decade if she wanted to be a SAHM. Why is this so difficult for people to understand? These two have shown no problem being away from their kids in other to have fun themselves. It is only when expected to be away from the kids for work that they start spinning the idea of being “engaged, hands-on parents” instead of working. As if working means you cannot be an engaged, hands-on parent. SMH
Being a working royal doing 500 engagements a year in not like working at the coal face.
Sophie wasn’t even an official working royal the two years she was expecting Louise and working engagements on the side while running her business. She still managed to put up twice the number of engagements in those two years than KM has ever done, pregnant or not. Edward is no where near the throne, unlike William. Sophie appears to be an engaged, dedicated mother – all while showing up and doing her royal job.
Nota, I completely agree. But you can even see in comments to this post and a few other recent ones that Kate being a “hands on mom” (I hate that term, btw) seems to give her a pass in other areas. It’s pretty smart on Kate’s part. People refuse to admit that Kate has more than one nanny, etc.
Kate clearly doesn’t want to be a working royal and while I hesitate to say that her children give her the “excuse” she needs to get out of it, since I think she loves her kids and her family, at the same time….having small children allows her to live out her fantasy life of a rich SAHM. But like you said, if that’s what she wanted to do, she married the wrong man and I cant believe that never occurred to her.
ok just on Sophie. Sophie was recorded in a newspaper sting in 2001 trying to sell access to the queen, slating Diana while simultaneously saying she was privately considered to be the new Diana. She also said something about nothing changing in the BRF until the old lady died (old lady being the queen mum). This was as part of the PR work she did. She was 36 at the time, and a complete disgrace after this, the coverage was intense as it was all so tacky and scandalous.
Kate is also 36, the firm can practically guarantee she’ll be scandal free, im sure theyd take that any day over the headlines Sophie generated while she ‘worked’.
Sophie was trapped in a sting operation, but it was Sarah trying to trade access to royals not Sophie. HM listened to the tapes and forgave Sophie. As a result of so many other things, E&S were made full-time royals after that. Charles was single, Andrew was single, Anne’s Tim doesn’t do royal engagements. HM needed a couple to send to foreign events, she sent E&S.
E&S have been HM’s go-to for oversees travel and interaction with other royals since. To the point that certain royal families refused to have W&K attend events and published that Sophie and Edward were the ones specifically invited. Lux royal wedding comes to mind as one. They’re the ones closest to other royal families, especially Edward with Joachim in Denmark, Sophie with Charlene in Monaco.
Sophie was granted HM’s personal Royal Family Order only three years later, less than the 5 year mark of the marriage. That would be the RFO Kate still doesn’t have after 7 years.
Kate is not scandal free. See the decade of doing nothing, Uncle Gary, etc. She’s been married in for 7 years and still barely cracks 100 engagements a year, many of which involve HoliTours. The two of them remain among the most costly to maintain (Apartment 1A, Anmer, security at her mummy’s house when William doesn’t want her around) in exchange for the least work.
Agreed, if waity wants to be a mother first, duchess second, SHE PICKED THE WRONG DUDE TO MARRY.
@atnotsugarhere I agree with you that the numbers say a great deal and the criticism they have received is completely valid. They are accountable to the tax payers and should respect that.
I laugh at the excuses made for kate. Since day one its been excuse after excuse. She needs time to adjust, shes pregnant, shes trying, etc. Kate looks like a great mom and it would have probably have ideal for her to have Pippa life. Rich husband, children, and no responsibilities. But she chose William and all the responsibilities that comes. Kate half asses everything and get praised like jesus. Meanwhile camilla actually does great work and gets trashed.
Meghan coming around has been good for her. The losers at dailymail and places like royaldish just love their regal elegant kate now that not good enough Meghan has come along.
The day is going to come though where kate wont be able to rely on her kids and meghan to get good press.
Its the constant excuses that people make for her that get me, she’s a grown woman who has showed us her ass (quite literally) and people are still refusing to see it.
As pointed on here before (thanks LAK!), Kate is the outlier. She is the only royal spouse in recent memory who failed to work. So many excuses made, so many lies, so many “I’m keen” PR statements. Everyone else marries in, gets to work, has kids, and keeps working while raising those kids.
The fact that ardent W&K fans have 1) fallen constantly for their lies and 2) defend their 1950s shtick? Must have W&K&Carole blissful.
This article is typical DM by being passive aggressive to both women! The media are desperate to create another Diana vs Fergie. The truth is neither Kate or Meghan are like the other two. Kate & Meghan don’t have the recklessness of Fergie, or the emotional turmoil of Diana. I see them more like having the same type of relationship as Princess Mary & Princess Marie of Denmark, who are also married to princes who are brothers. They remain friendly, not necessarily being the best of friends but are both mature enough to be cordial.
Lol surprised you haven’t posted on Meghan and Harry’s tour and the Zika virus. You know because some people are “concerned”
Concern trolls. They’ll either blame her for putting Baby Sussex in danger or condemn her for getting pregnant to secure her finances. They don’t care.
Both women are royal wives. With that comes obligation. Catherine seems to have decided to make Williams life (home life especially) as nice as possible. Remember he was the child his mother used as her confidant which could not have been easy. Meghan will be the added polish to the work that Harry does. I am sure when their children come she too will want to provide the solid home life that the boys missed.
Ah, the ongoing theme that a woman cannot be a good wife and mother if she works a handful of hours a week for charity. Along with the two housekeepers, cooks, cleaners, and nannies who do the majority of the work of course (all paid by the taxpayers).
The obligation is to work for their supper. Or 50 room palace, 10 bedroom mansion, and million in clothing in seven years.
@NOTA. But all of that is owed to William because twenty years ago, his parents behaved badly.
@Snappy fish. I am actually sympathetic to William if what he went through was a form of parentification by Diana and being used for pr at different points by the family, but the solution isn’t treating him like he’s fragile. Kate’s existence isn’t to soothe William’s issues and it would be unhealthy if that’s what they were actually doing. And anyway they seem fine when they’re playing about at Harry Potter World (?) or at Wimbledon when William was mocking people who might have been affected by a tube strike.
If William is still truly experiencing mental health issues from what his parents did over 25 years ago then perhaps he should apply the advice he keeps giving to others about mental health, which is to talk about it, preferably with a professional.
No spouse , including Kate, is equipped to treat longstanding psychological issues if that is truly what is happening here. Baking cookies and changing diapers won’t fix it.
My point was simply these women CHOSE this life. Which is supporting the family and having heirs. They will do more than most by way of charity. I was simply stating that most children from divorce are v v driven to have a solid foundation in their own families if possible. Catherine is the only one of the 4 that had that foundation and she is trying to provide it for her husband & children. Both women are well educated and I expect once tbey are given their reins will far surpass their husbands in the way of work that matters to others. Actions speak louder than words. Time will tell but so far it looks like both women are doing a good job making their husbands happy
That outfit is so fussy. The color is great but all those fussy, frumpy details make Kate look like she’s from a hundred years ago and her name is Petunia.
I think the media is creating this competition between Kate and Meghan. The fact is the firms view is that someday William will be King and Kate Queen of England. There is no competition there. Meghan will have to courtesy to her in Public and stand behind Kate at different ceremonies. As George and Charlotte get older people will be fascinated by what they are doing and will be photographed more. I don’t even know much about the Royal grand kids it is always been William and Harry, the others take a back seat. I think the Palace sets it up that way.
I have noticed that many Kate fans reiterate every time that William will be King and Kate Queen consort and that Harry and Meghan will be behind them. I don’t understand the reason to repeat it every time. It really seems that you fear Harry and Meghan and their popolarity.
And it doesn’t say much that Kate is upheld for her status not her actions, though fitting I guess for monarchy.
I have always wondered if some of her fans would still be as protective if he weren’t married to the second in line. If part of the support is based on her status and not Kate as a person.
Much of the interest in this couple has never had anything to do with them as people. As it stands, they’re nothing special. It has always had to do with Diana’s Eldest Son and his +1.
If Meghan is so unimportant to the monarchy, then why is the Queen taking time and using resources on her? Charles is first in line, but his siblings still do a lot of work (especially Anne). The Royal Family will not survive with just Will and Kate looking cute in photos with their children.
While Kate may become Queen Consort, I think someone pulled her aside to remind her that if she continues in her current trajectory, she won’t be the People’s Royal. There’s only so much doting to young children Kate can do, and if her children always come before her work obligations (patronages to charities, no less) she nor William will have the public’s goodwill.
So let’s all just get prepared for a ton of pap shots with the kids because, let’s face it, Kate’s only true patronage is herself and her own. Anything else is a chore, and a few quick shots while at a polo game to keep herself visible is a bearable sacrifice in the long term.
I find it interesting that a site that holds itself up as feminist is SO dedicated to the constant comparison of Meghan and Kate. It has zero to do with one being “better” or that one will “fall short”. It’s gross to use the existence of one woman to put another down – for one thing, it turns Meghan into a tool and instead of treating her like a person, treats her an avenue to bludgeon another person. And yet this criticism is waved off with a logical fallacy – “are you saying they can’t ever be compared” or “you don’t want them compared because Kate will fall short”. No. It’s because it’s in EVERY piece and it’s gross.
+1 Bridget
“Richard Kay at the Daily Mail is not following the new sacred rule which was laid down by the defenders of the Duchess of Cambridge: Kate and Meghan Markle must never, ever be compared… unless Kate comes out favorably. That’s the only time it’s “allowed” to compare the two. But one must never make mention of the fact that Kate is changing before our very eyes with the entrance of Meghan into the royal fold. One must always praise Kate. ”
Me thinks Kaiser was aiming that paragraph at you.
@notasugarhere, I believe Bridget covered that. It is the part she called a logical fallacy.
I think a passel of new names, all pro-Kate, are taking issue with Kaiser’s long-standing criticism of W&K. Just trying to spin any kind of attack you can, but the site owners gets to express their opinion on their site.
Hey notasugarhere, how come you feel the need to make conspiracy-like accusations about “new names” and “new posters” in seemingly every thread? You do realise any site with a comment section has far more lurkers than regular posters, right? I doubt you recognise my name because I rarely post, but I’ve been following this site since at least 2010. I know you’re probably used to dominating the conversation along with that posse of “regulars”, but the casuals like me should still be able to chime in every once in a while. 🙂
Chime in plenty. There has just been such an obvious rash of new posters, especially names I’ve never seen on any other (non-royal) threads. It happens every so often, that CB becomes a target of a certain group. Sometimes obvious, sometimes not.
+2 Bridget. As far as I can see, these women took only slightly different paths to end up in the same place, but it seems we have to bash the way Kate got there and applaud the way Megs got there (personally, I wouldn’t have wanted the life either of them jumped through hoops for). And history has shown us that the BRF will not be kind to either of them in the long run, so I hope they become besties. God knows, they are going to need each other. Come to think of it, I think that’s what’s so gross about these articles – It’s not so much the comparisons, but the current of a gleeful hope that they will hate each other.
Only slightly different path? What do they have in common besides having both gone to college?
Honestly, it’s 1:42pm here, and it’s still to early for these kinds of jokes.
Let’s see – According to everyone here, Kate never worked and waited for her prince. Gave up opportunities afforded by a good college education to marry into the royal family. Meghan has a good college education, had a good job, and her own lifestyle brands and she gave everything up to marry her prince. Whose to say what kind of job Kate would have had if she had met Wills later or how soon Meghan would have given up everything if she had met Harry earlier. To me, they had the same prize in sight, and they both went for it hard core. So yeah, to me… they have a lot in common. And I don’t fault either of them for it. I like them both, and hope they have a lovely relationship.
That is a stretch. Meghan had an actual career and closed down her projects when it was clear there was going to be an engagement. We’re now hearing about how she’s jumped right in to royal work. She was already getting involved with charity projects and now she gets to do it at a very high level.
Kate was always free to work, chose to not do that and married William 6 years after graduating from college. And we all know how her charity work has gone. Chelsy and Cressida both had their own lives. Kate chose to not follow that path.
Kate didn’t want to work. It had nothing to do with dating a royal. Why not just like Kate for who she is instead of altering Meghan’s story?
How do you figure I’m altering the story? I said they took different paths to get to the exact same place. My personal opinion is that they had the exact same goals when the opportunity to become a royal presented itself, and they were both willing to give up anything/everything to be a princess. Since you brought them up, I would say Chelsy & Cressida are the ones who are much more different than Kate & Megs. And I like Kate & Meghan. Which is why I can see they aren’t as different as the stans of either of them would have you believe.
So the only similarity is they didn’t work a nonroyal career as a royal? They both give up some privacy and freedom because we actually don’t know what they do with the majority of their time but royal life can be what you make of it. Meghan was already doing charity work and the wedding indicate that she’s bringing her personality into this marriage. It’s too early to determine what she gave up vs. what she’s moving on from.
Kate didn’t do anything that she had to give up. That’s one of the major differences between the two women. And there’s nothing to indicate it was because she was going to be a royal. It was always made clear that wasn’t a requirement as a royal girlfriend. The issue raised with Kate is that she chose to seriously pursue nothing else besides being William’s girlfriend for six years with no engagement for the majority of it and even a very public breakup.
Meghan didn’t do this and it’s clearly shaped the two women differently. How they chose to get to where they were when they got engaged strongly matters because that’s part of what made them who they are. They’re not newly formed with their new titles.
Meghan transitioned her charity interests into being a royal. She brought her prior activity under a new umbrella. She chose to leave Suits which makes sense seeing as it shoots in Canada but who know what creative thing she’ll choose to do that doesn’t take away from her current priority of charity work. She chose to stop her blog but we’ll see how she decides to highlight her causes and people in her role as a royal.
Meghan has had 3 weeks vs. Kate’s 7 years so in time we’ll see how much of Kate’s life consists of her personal choices and not giving things up or restrictions like royal protocol or risking overshadowing other people.
Well said, Bridget.
@Bridget, I totally agree. I believe it is to get more comments, which is working obviously.
ITA with Bridget. It generates clicks & comments – and I’m guilty too. 🙂
On a site called Celebitchy, you’re complaining because 1) you’ve chosen to visit and 2) you don’t like the site?
The writers here have always called out Kate Middleton for her laziness, it is nothing new. For her laziness, her spendthrift nature, her lies, her anti-feminist behavior, her “keenness” to work quickly followed by yet another pregnancy.
Now she has a new co-worker who has a work ethic. But now we’re no longer allowed to say the same comments we’ve been saying for years because you don’t like them? We’re not allowed to compare two women who are in the same job and public family?
Meghan isn’t a tool, she isn’t unique. She’s doing what all the other royal married-ins have done – gotten down to work. Commenting on that without also commenting on how it contrasts to her sister in law makes no sense. Unless you just don’t like how KM compares.
We compare royal on here all the time. You don’t like that two women who married two famous brothers are compared? Not sure why you’re here.
We know why you’re here.
Do tell.
Slightly different?
Well said @Bridget.
It’s not the comparing that’s tiresome so much as the ridiculous intensity and borderline pettiness of it on every single Kate/Meghan-related thread.
100pc agree Bridget, i mean, im guilty too as i read the comments, they kind of fascinate me. It’s like when you stumble onto a trump loving thread on facebook, you cant help but read it in awe, the conspiracy theories people will believe to fit their narrative. Someone downthread has even accused Kate of being an attention seeker for wearing high heels? its bonkers, kind of fascinating.
You are spot on about the Trump loving threads and this threads. This is why constitutional monarchy is the most stable form of govt. People are able to separate the sense of identity they need from govt and the politics of the day. The reason some people can’t criticize trump even though they disagree with his policies is that they have a strong attachment to that sense of identity which in the uk is fulfilled by the mornachy.
Maybe it’s not a competition, but if Meghan and Catherine are competing in the stupid hat contest, it will be hard to pick a winner.
Beatrice will rule them all!
^ This – Princess B is the hat Queen of the RF but Granny does give them all a run for their hat money.
Sophie, Camilla, Eugenie, Zara, Autumn, even Anne. They’ve all had some pretty silly hats. The only one who sticks to classic and simple (even in hats) is Lady Sarah Chatto.
After being mocked for her hat at WK’s wedding, Beatrice really toned it down. Prior to that, her hats were a wonder. Now they are boring and conformist. Isabella Blow doesn’t approve.
Eugenie’s recent “love” hat was interesting.
We need to stop trying to compare these two women. They are not in a competition. They might really like each other !
They are employees of the same firm, a taxpayer-funded one.
since all of these assomptions are nothing more than fanfiction, I for myself choose to believe that Kate and Meghan are happily reading gossip and laughing out loud in Kensington Palace while drinking herbal tea with Louis on Kate’s lap.
And Liz thinks, “Hmph, amateurs,” while sipping her midmorning drink.
Queens: they’re just like us !
😉
@ Marie + 1 It never ceases to amaze me how people are such wonderful mind readers. Also, Kate does nothing, she is lazy, Kate appears, she is competing or doing a “look at me”.
I found this paragraph offensive.
Meghan needs to get pregnant right away: There is one area where Meghan cannot compete with Kate — children. Harry yearns to become a father and the sight of George and Charlotte playing in the sunshine also carried a powerful message. For Kate was showing that, as a member of the Royal Family, being a mother is the most important thing of all. So it may be that rather than Kate copying Meghan, Meghan will want to copy Kate.
More eye-rollingly laughable rather than offensive, I thought, just Kay making a ridiculous throwback, sexist arse of himself.
That paragraph is awful. Preposterous as well.
It bothers me when people like Jonathan Kay stress that Meghan needs to get pregnant right away. The fact is, she doesn’t. And she is not that old. What if she has trouble conceiving? Maybe they don’t want children. She is not a baby-making machine. She doesn’t need to copy Kate.
In Luxenburg, the Hereditary Prince Guillaume and his wife Stephanie have been married for 5.5 years. And what are the comments about? When is she going to have a baby? His brothers have two children each, so there are no shortage of heirs, but still the comments persists. Doesn’t occur to many people that they might behaving problems conceiving or that they just plain don’t want children.
The author here is Richard Kay, but it’s funny you used Jonathan Kay, because he is also a super irritating Canadian columnist whose mother Barbara Kay writes the most anti women columns in the National Post and he takes after her. Maybe it’s got something to do with the last name.
I also agree that the entire section about Meghan needing to get pregnant is offensive.
@NIC 919 oh God, didn’t mean Jonathan Kay. You’re right. Awful guy. Not crazy about Barbara Kay either,come to think of it.
The Lux couple? She announced in their engagement interview that they wouldn’t start trying for kids for at least three years. Interesting for strict Catholics to say, no? She’s repeated that again recently, that they’re in no rush.
Maybe they are trying and not being successful. Maybe they aren’t trying. Or maybe they don’t want kids. Only one of his brother’s is out of the succession, so his other three siblings and their kids could take over if necessary.
The heirs wife ends up being even lazier than Kate, which is an amazing feat. She was handed Lux citizenship upon marriage, which caused a big public outcry, and she doesn’t even work in return.
Nota, is Prince Louis in Lux the one who is out of the succession? If so why? I thought he had been reinstated when the second child was born. I know he and Tessy are divorced and she is going for a big settlement. Anyway, Felix has two children, so there are enough heirs. I love discussing other royals. Thanks for the info.
No, he and both their sons are out. They received titles years later (as did Tessy), but all three are permanently out of the succession. It was because Louis and Tessy didn’t want their second son, born after they married, to be in the line when their first son wasn’t. The line currently goes Guillaume, Felix, Amalia (daughter of Felix), Liam (son of Felix), Alexandra, Sebastian.
They aren’t legally divorced yet. She seems to be holding it up over money, keeping the big home in London, and a title. She is quickly turning into Fergie at her lowest points, taking on promoting plastic surgery clinics and using instagram to bash her royal in-laws. She’s already lost her job with the secretive group headed up by Jamie Lowther-P, the former advisor for William and Harry. They likely didn’t appreciate her public social media antics.
She doesn’t understand that her in-laws have money but her soon-to-be-ex husband does not. Her alimony doesn’t get to be based on their money but his, which isn’t very much since he’s just graduated and gotten a job. She probably earns more than he does! His parents paid for their house in London, both of her degrees, and their sons’ schooling at boarding school. They aren’t required to keep her in big luxury digs while she hunts up a new husband on her multiple trips to Dubai.
I know it’s the most unlikely thing to happen, but I would personally love for Harry and Meghan to be a modern, childfree couple who use their innate warmth and affection for children to do charitable work with kids as opposed to bringing up another round of employees for the Firm.
Also, Kate looked drunk in those pictures and still has Xanax eyes to me. Feel free to fight me on that, but dollars to donuts she’s been messing around with her mood stabilizers and benzos again.
Has anyone in the royal family ever adopted a child in need?
That child would be even more attacked than Beatrice and Eugenie are. Why wish that on a kid?
What are Xanax eyes?
I suspect she has mental health issues as well including bulimia. I truly hope she is getting help and keeps this much healthier weight. 🤞
They both have openly talked about having children. It will happen.
Yeah, sure. So it could be another thing for the media to dog Meghan about. They’ll assume she can’t have kids or the Royal family is stopping them from having kids because they don’t want any black blood entering their family lines.
I’ve read a lot of comments on the DailyFail, twitter and Tumblr who hope and wish Meghan can’t have kids or their marriage falls apart before kids so Harry can save the title of “his first born” for some perfect Blonde Aristo they’re still hoping he dumps Meghan for.
Harry has talked openly about his desire to start a family very quickly. She will have a baby by next year.
That’s if everything goes smoothly.. I am Meghan’s age and I have PCOS.
The gross DM is really pushing the woman hate woman narrative. Some suckers are falling for it.
@Sage: Not true. Many people, myself included, think they’re probably friendly and get along just fine. But that doesn’t make any of what was said in this article untrue.
Can I say how utterly disgusting the last part is? The idea that Meghan can’t/won’t out bred Kate is disrespectful to both women. A Women’s value are not solely based on how many kids we can birth. I doubt the Royal family is holding competitions on how many babies each Royal wife can pop out.
If Kay’s only “point on the board” for Kate vs Meghan is that she has/will have more kids, than they’re painting her to be far more pathetic than what I thought. In this day and age, no woman should be valued solely for her uterus.
Ugh, I hate the Daily Mail. Meghan and Harry will have kids in due time. I hate that they’re trying to frame it as she can’t give him all the babies he wants.
I KNOW. For god’s sake Richard Kay, you old fossil!
I think he is losing a step, as some of the points in the article are nonsensical. He tries to contrast Kate’s low cost frock at polo with Meghan’s off the shoulder couture outfit at Trooping? Kate was wearing freaking McQueen at Trooping, its not like she stumbled out there onto the balcony in a chain store sundress.