Duchess Kate finally announces her charity patronages – there are five

HIDE YO BUTTONS. Duchess Kate is comin’! At loooooong last, Duchess Kate has finally signed on for some charity work, otherwise known as a “job”. Kate is rather famous for her laziness when it comes to anything not involving “getting the ring.” Soon after the engagement, the Palace went into overdrive, trying to fluff up Kate’s meager CV to make it sound like she did more than wait around for a prince for nine years. The palace also claimed – once again, this was a year ago – that now that Kate was joining the royal family, she was “studying” and “researching” which charities she wanted to become involved with, and that she would announce her patronages when married. Then came the shifting goalposts and the “princess lessons” and of course, lots of shopping and hair appointments. So finally, we are upon the day when Kate finally gives us a list of patronages. She spent more than a year creating a list of five charitable organizations. FIVE. A YEAR.

The Duchess of Cambridge is ready to hit the new year running! The palace announced the good causes that will get the benefit of her super-hot publicity. Her choices will likely bring comparisons with husband William’s late mother Princess Diana as she adopts a group of children’s hospices and an addiction charity. And young Boy Scouts in North Wales are set for a surprise when the outdoor pursuits-loving royal pops in to volunteer.

A palace source says Kate – 30 on Monday – sifted through “a few hundred” requests in order to make her choice of four patronages and her volunteer position.

“She did her own research and chose these after approaches or because they reflected the areas she was already aware of, especially in the arts and outdoor activities,” says the source. And the announcement could herald Kate’s first public solo engagement soon – it is likely to take place when Royal Air Force helicopter pilot William is away in the Falkland Islands in February and March.

The organizations are:

1. Patron of Action on Addiction, which works in research, prevention, treatment, professional workforce development and support for families and children.

When she was doing her research, Kate came to realize that addiction “lay at the heart of many of the social issues she was looking at,” a palace source tells PEOPLE.

She has paid a private visit to one of the charity’s treatment centers and spoke to clients about their addiction and personal journeys to recovery, the charity says.

Chief Executive, Nick Barton, says Kate’s “support will enable us to keep the issue of addiction in the spotlight. Addiction is a consuming condition that results in a great deal of harm to individuals, families, communities and society as a whole. ”

2. Royal Patron of East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices, which supports families and cares for children with life-threatening conditions in Cambridge, among other areas. As well as being a “moving issue,” this is one of the “leading charities in palliative care and there is also the Cambridge link,” the palace source explains.

3. Royal Patron of The Art Room, set up in 2002 to offer art as therapy to children aged between five and 16, using art to raise their self esteem, confidence and independence.

Kate made a private visit to a unit in North London during her research. The Art Room’s founder Juli Beattie said in a statement, “It is a fantastic endorsement of . . . the role that art and creativity can play in helping children and young people whose start in life has been difficult.”

4. Patron of the National Portrait Gallery. Kate visited the London gallery in September during her work to decide on the causes she wanted to patronize.

And the choice reflects her interest in arts (two of her “big hobbies” are “photography and painting, which she does privately,” the palace source says.) She did some pre-university study in the Italian city of Florence and read Art History at St. Andrew’s University – where she met William, 29.

5. Volunteering in the the Scout Association – specifically for cub scout packs and more junior “Beaver Scout Colonies.” Palace sources point out that Kate (and sister Pippa) was a Brownie herself and wants to “get stuck in” locally. “This role allows a level of flexibility for her to volunteer in North Wales or elsewhere,” the source says.

“She is a big hill-walker and does a lot of outdoor pursuits. So, she might teach them how to pack a rucksack, how to put a tent up, cooking in a camp situation,” Simon Carter, a spokesman for the Scouts Association, tells PEOPLE. “All those sorts of things are skills she might pass on as she’s an adult who’s got some expertise in that area.”

[From People]

I don’t hate any of these, and I appreciate the diversity in issues. I wouldn’t have thought Kate was brave enough or substantial enough to become a patroness to a charity dealing with addiction issues. Waity’s going to meet some sex addicts! And I think the whole “volunteering for the Scouts” is really cute, actually. I’m very happy that she finally signed on to some significant work, and my only complaint is still “She should have done this a long time ago.”

Of course, there’s always the issue of Kate being in over her head. A lot of people were talking about how “off” she seemed in this interview in November. I didn’t think she was as awful as other people claimed, but she just seems… nervous? Out of her depth? She doesn’t have William’s ease.

Photos courtesy of Fame, WENN.

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

134 Responses to “Duchess Kate finally announces her charity patronages – there are five”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Astrid says:

    At least it’s a start. Wonder how much she’ll actually do for these 5 charities?

  2. Ponytail says:

    As soon as I read about this in the Guardian today, I thought “Will this finally make Celebitchy happy ?!” :-) Obviously not, but then, I don’t come here to read about how much you like celebrities (well, except for yesterday’s Fassbender piece, which drove me to the newsagents today to read GQ, Intelligent Life and Sight and SOund, all who had pieces on him).

  3. brin says:

    Well William was brought up in the public eye so it comes more naturally to him than to Kate. I’m glad she is taking on some worthwhile causes.

  4. CG says:

    I remember seeing that interview when it came out. She def looked nervous and like she was out of her element when not rigorously prepared for taking questions. And Will gave her the side eye a few times!

  5. Emily says:

    As much as I love to hate her, I think we should let her have this.

    Well done Waity!

  6. GoodCapon says:

    8 months and 5 patronages to show for it… it’s quite underwhelming. She’s also just a patron – it’s nothing more than meeting and sharing drinks/having dinner with VIPs, dressing up, making a few speeches, that sort of thing.
    Still, I guess she has to start somewhere.

    Somehow I find her choice to support Action on Addiction to be dodgy… her own very classy uncle is a DRUG DEALER!

    • WhiteNoise says:

      ?? So what if he is? How is that relevant to the causes she supports?

    • EmmaStoneWannabe says:

      How absurd that anyone would try to undermine charity work in this way. That person’s situation has nothing to do with her. For all we know, she hasn’t seen that person in years or it could be false info. We cannot help who are family members are, nor what they do. Please be smart when you post.

      • inthekitchen says:

        You should search google before you slag someone off – there is video of her uncle doing drugs and bragging about how he’ll have a wing at Buckingham Palace. And, he was invited to – and attended – her wedding. She and Wills have also vacationed at his home which he calls La Maison de Bang Bang.

        So, not some blacksheep of the family that she doesn’t acknowledge…

      • GoodCapon says:

        How grand of you to tell me to be “smart” when I post when you can’t even take a leaf out of your own book. The next time you say funny things like “For all we know, she hasn’t seen that person in years or it could be false info.” remember that Google is just one click away. If you’re being smart,you would’ve already done your research first about Uncle Gary.

    • L says:

      If anything that makes it more important to her. From what I understand he was cut out of the middleton family a long while back, but I’m sure she’s heard stories about what drug addiction can lead to.

      • diana says:

        L you understood wrong, because Kate took William to visit her uncle in his house. After the fact that he is a drug dealer and pimp was made public.

        Also some of the high elite Kate’s friends suck how one of them declared on her facebook that she wants to buy a gun and shoot foreigners for fun. Picked up by cops, next day on the street with all dear Kate by her side.

        I don’t know anyone that would make such a terrible statment on fb, never mind hanging out wiht them afterwards.

        Same girl (Kate’s very dear friend that shows up in many of her pictures) likes to take her t-shirt off very so often.

      • Kate says:

        “Also some of the high elite Kate’s friends suck how one of them declared on her facebook that she wants to buy a gun and shoot foreigners for fun. Picked up by cops, next day on the street with all dear Kate by her side.”

        Oh, this one I do know about, and sorry, but that’s rubbish. The girl in question is very dodgy, yes – Kate met her on that Dragon Boat race thing (she didn’t know her before, she had mutual friends doing it as well) and then the Palace worked out she ran upmarket orgies and Kate pulled out very sharpish. The girl has huffed that Kate has had nothing to do with her ever since as though that’s in some way a shock. And then posted vile comments on Facebook or Twitter, can’t remember which. But sorry, you’re mistaken that there has been any friendship or contact ongoing – there’s been none since the boat thingie ended (and Kate got given hell for dropping out, so the poor girl can’t win. I know she’s boring, but I do feel a bit of sympathy over that) according to all the UK press. As mentioned, the girl, whose name escapes me, has whined to the Daily Mail about it. To be honest this seems a really good example of someone wanting to hate her, and just creating a fantasy from some very different facts to justify it. If all you have is her uncle taking drugs (his choice, not hers) and a girl a friend introduced her to turning out to be dodgy (and then she dropped all contact at once) you don’t have much. That’s all I can say.

      • diana says:

        ha! i am not wrong. there are pics of her and the girl in question on the street chatting and having fun. next day after she was arrested. i would post the link to it but i am sick of keep posting stuff. google it yourself.

      • Kate says:

        Sorry, but you’re wronger than incest. The pics used were archive ones taken at the time of the Dragon Boat race. The story was news because she knew Kate, and those were the only photos they had, so they used them even though they were years out of date. On account of how they don’t know one another well, or other pics would have been chosen.

        You do know there’s no law saying the press can only use photos of people if they took them that week, right? You’d never see images of Diana or Monroe otherwise.

        Links to convince:

        Kate rowing pic (check out the jewellery, hair and t-shirt): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-473582/Palace-forces-Kate-quit-boat-race-So-Wills.html

        Pic of Kate and “pal” in the street as you allege, used to illustrate they know one another in the article on Sayle’s vile comments: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343017/Kate-Middletons-friend-cautioned-police-joke-shooting-illegal-immigrants.html

        The first is a story dated 2007. The second is dated 2010. Yet the photos were clearly taken on the same day.

        You’re wrong on this. Sorry, but you just are. She is dull, I agree. She is pretty but not dazzling, and I find the PR campaign by the Palace transparent as well. But c’mon, if you need to resort to fantasy to hate on her, you must lack decent ammunition. No?

    • GoodCapon says:

      Isn’t that a conflict of interest? To support a charity while at the same time turning a blind eye to your uncle’s shortcomings?

      “For all we know, she hasn’t seen that person in years or it could be false info.”

      Where were you on Apr. 29 last year? Her uncle was at her wedding. NOTW did undercover work on him, he offered cocaine to one of their undercover reporters and not only that, he also offered prostitutes to them. Now, NOTW was one disgusting tabloid but they knew where to look for scoops so I wouldn’t put these under “false info”.

      • Kate says:

        I’m sorry – are you seriously saying that if a member of your family developed an addiction, you’d think the morally correct thing to do would be to block them from ever having anything to do with you again?

        I get that you want to criticise the woman, but having a compassion bypass isn’t doing that very effectively, because she isn’t the one coming off jaw-droppingly badly.

      • JulieM says:

        Kate: It was more than an addiction. He was dealing the stuff.

    • Zelda says:

      I’d say that if anything, that makes her consideration for the issue more necessary and more logical.

  7. WillyNilly says:

    Is being a “big hill walker” a hobby? How does WALKING qualify someone for a scout post? O_o

    • Seal Team 6 says:

      Fell walking and/or running are huge sports in the UK.

    • Kate says:

      I’m a Brit. Walking is a really popular sport here – the Rambler’s Association are huge. My own mother has walked from Lands End to John O’Groats (bottom to top of the island) and she’s not alone. She walks in Europe, too. (It’s kind of like we don’t have baseball, I think? The nearest thing, rounders, is this game little kids play.)

    • layla says:

      Im going to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume “big hill walking” is more the equivalent of hiking/trekking than merely walking up a hilly street! ;)

  8. Dee says:

    Kaiser you crack me up! You always seem to post the worst/most random/inappropriate/embarrassing pictures of Kate.
    Good on her…about time as well!!!

  9. WhiteNoise says:

    Nice diverse mix of causes. Pleased re AonA, the addiction field struggles so much for funding. It’s a great organisation, and having Kate as a patron will continue to keep the sterling work it does at the fore.

  10. Zelda says:

    I DO think this took a lot of research–making sure people wouldn’t be offended by this or upset by that. A lot of polling and professional opinion probably went into these choices. And I’m really impressed with her choice of addictions, which is typically seen as a “lowbrow” cause.

    That said–and I will get flamed for this– 3 out of 5 are children’s charities? For real? Is she trying to draw comparisons to Diana? Going with “safe” causes? 2/5 wouldn’t have been enough in a world with so many issues?

    The choice of so many children’s issues just reeks of “ladies should care about children”…it’s vaguely misogynystic, in a way, or at least a throwback

    • Redheadwriter says:

      Not flamed but I have to disagree. Research shows that the earlier we reach children — even before birth — increases brain development. Which in turn leads to healthier children, which in turn leads to healthier adults, etc., etc., thereby easing some of the other issues we face in the world.

    • inthekitchen says:

      While I totally do think she is trying to draw as many comparisons to Diana as she can (I believe she thought by marrying William she’d instantly be as loved and worshiped as Diana was…without having to do a darn thing) she never will be because she has no charisma. Anyway, that’s a different story!

      I am a huge critic of Waity, but I don’t mind her starting with 3/5 children’s charities. She’s “young(ish)” and very inexperienced (i.e. no real work experience of any significance) so maybe this will be a good way to ease into her royal duties since hanging out with children would be lower-stress than adults (for someone who can’t even answer a few questions about a cause she supposedly really cares about, see: UNICEF video).

      I also think she’d better get down to popping out some babies soon, so maybe this feels like where her interests will be for the next 5-10 years (young children).

      Even though I don’t think she’ll do more than have some charity galas so she can play dress up some more, I do give her props for actually naming some charities. I was sure we wouldn’t get anything until March and then she’d be pregnant so…more of a delay for any real “work.”

  11. Kellie says:

    Hold the applause people. This is a busy year for the royal family and once she gets pregnant how much will she really “work”. Me thinks this announcement is to shut people up. Lets wait and see if she actually does anything on her own.

  12. Amanda says:

    She was REALLY nrevous. Check out how blinky she is! She should be called blinky not waity-

  13. EmmaStoneWannabe says:

    IMHO, the charities she selected – or were selected for her – all sound worthwhile. Good for her! We cannot judge her efforts until time has passed. I hope we get to see pics of her camping with scouts for a couple days; Wonder if that would shut ppl up a bit.

  14. It is ME!! says:

    I can totally understand the art thing: linking her studies of art history to charity. Makes sense.

    But, really? She’s “outdoorsy”? Are there pics backing this up, because I’ve never heard of her being an outdoors enthusiast.

    Somebody from the UK help me. ;)

    • EmmaStoneWannabe says:

      Kate has been known for rowing. Also, there have been many pics of her and William skiing and going out for hikes and shoots. I would say she is pretty “outdoorsey” from these evident past/current hobbies of hers.

  15. Coby says:

    Well, good for her. And although I like her, I am getting a bit tired of the hair. It’s just too much

  16. Cathy says:

    Well, good for her. But why couldn’t she choose the girl scouts instead of the boy scouts. If she was a brownie, you think she would of

  17. Shay Kay says:

    I really like the idea of her supporting the charity that uses art to connect with children that have behavior issues. I didn’t find the addiction charity that surprising as so many people relate to the cause but not everyone has experienced either first or second hand children with truly heartbreaking behaviorial issues.She may never get her hands dirty but she can spotlight the problem and bring understanding to these children and their parents which I think is actually her job.I’ve been exposed to children such as these in school environments and anything that could benefit them or their families is a step in the right direction.

  18. diana says:

    Good for her. I’m hoping that she will do some work. However I doubt it.

    The video psoted above by Kaiser has a different angle. It ain’t that bad.

    But same video where you can see Kate’s face….let me speechless:

    http://fabulouslycatherine.tumblr.com/post/12243122531/catherine-duchessofcambridge-arghhhh-3

    And she knew where she is going, what she is doing, she should have been better prepared for this. Fire your PR person lady!

    • GoodCapon says:

      Oh God, look at the comments… her worshippers are out of this world.

      • badrockandroll says:

        So are her detractors.

      • GoodCapon says:

        Why? Because we refuse to kiss this woman’s a**? That some of us dare to look beneath all the dresses, the hair extensions and raccoon makeup and realize that she is nothing but a vapid, dull, useless woman?

      • badrockandroll says:

        btn your screen name and your metaphor, I am left with an awful image of a castrated rooster looking under Kate middleton’s dresses. Can’t help it.

        People talk all the time about carbon footprints, but there is also an emotional or humane one. What on earth has this woman done to anyone? She hasn’t harmed anyone has she? No sex tapes, no drunken escapades, just a nice decorative non-offensive wife for a nice decorative figurehead monarchy. I don’t think that a university degree is required for the job – her husband’s granny doesn’t have one, and she seems to be doing quite nicely.

        I don’t see how she deserves such vitriol – she seems kind of harmless to me. But I haven’t done the amount of research about her that you appear to have done about someone you don’t seem to care for very much.

      • Kate says:

        I don’t have strong views on her because I’m pretty much unsure a monarchy is morally justifiable at all, even with the positives in terms of election costs and politicians being divisive figures when heads of state. But I genuinely don’t get the obsessive hatred, either. She seems harmless. Who cares if she had a career? It’s her business, and her family’s if they were bankrolling her. It’s not like she killed puppies. And at this point, she’s still a minor royal, so I don’t get why it’s an outrage that she’s easing in slowly, and still nervous when dealing with the spotlight.

        Fair enough given she’s a public figure, and it isn’t like she’ll be crying into her skinny latte over what some random American she’ll never meet thinks… but it still reads a bit weirdly when you try to argue she should have nothing to do with either an addiction charity or her own uncle because he has similar issues, and that anyone who disagrees with you on hating someone who actually seems incredibly bland is a “worshipper”. She’s a smily, moderately pretty posh girl who’s only known about at all because of who she married. No, she’s not Aung San Suu Kyi, but she’s not Casey Anthony either. I don’t get why she provokes such an extreme reaction.

        I dunno, I have the same feeling aboutthe Angelina/Jen fans. I’m all – seriously? SERIOUSLY? We all like to gossip, but I think sometimes we also need to take a teensy step back and remember we don’t know these people. We’re all just having fun pretending otherwise.

      • GoodCapon says:

        I am interested in ROYALTY in general, so yes I do my reserach.

        badrockandroll – Next time, I suggest you do your own research first (if you don’t consider it infra dig) before spouting comments like “she’s kind of harmless” because that is general talk for people who don’t know anything about her and haven’t heard of her before Wills proposed to her. Regarding my username, I like the word capon, thank you very much.

        Kate – I’m not American. There are pro-Kates in other forums (royalty forums though) who like her. However I respect their opinion because they know better than most people and are willing to give Kate a chance to grow into her role. When I said worshippers, I was referring to those teenyboppers who idolize her, who are only interested in WILLIAM, KATE, HARRY AND PIPPA and not about the Royal Family in general. Pippa is hardly royalty but as you can see, they clearly jumped on the Royal Wedding bandwagon. These people are your typical teenagers who are constantly bombarded with the glitzy side of royalty and swallow every single bullsh*t of it. Do you see the difference? One side are royalty-educated and well-informed, the other one are seriously deluded and have their rose-tinted glasses on.

      • badrockandroll says:

        I have researched her.

        I can find no credible or trustworthy evidence that she has cured cancer, can turn water into wine or can run a mile in less than one minute. On the other hand, I can find no credible or trustworthy evidence that she is an embezzler, murderer, war criminal, child rapist or bank robber.

        So I’m going to stick with my verdict of kind of harmless.

      • Kate says:

        Oh I *see*. You’re not obsessively hating on a complete stranger based on tabloid gossip. You’re “well-informed”. All becomes clear. ;)

        For the record: I think she seems a little dull, I think she’s pretty but by no means beautiful, and I personally do believe she has an eating disorder. And I also realise the Palace are fiercely trying to get all the press in line. But I still think she seems basically nice, and so the sheer extent of the venom seems odd. I think the same about people attacking Angelina/Jen, too. Side-taking’s human, but thinking you know “the truth” about any celebrity, based solely on the media, is deluded. I love history – just finished Antonia Fraser’s “The Journey” – but I’m under no illusions that that makes me an expert on Marie Antoinette. And at least her private diaries and her contenporaries’ memoirs are available to fact-check with.

    • diana says:

      yes i do my research well before i decide to go ahead and like or dislike someone. second of all i am not american.

      • Kate says:

        The kind of careful research where you assume a pic in the paper has to have been taken that day or the one before? Because forgive me, but your track record on the evidence of this thread is unimpressive. ;)

  19. Paloma says:

    I have no complaints with Kate. I think she is beautiful, has style is elegant, and she is a well rounded person, unlike Diana who was ill-suited for her position.

    • Snappyfish says:

      Well said Paloma. Most people worship the idea of Diane when in truth she was quite ill suited & not well educated & it took her quite awhile to morph into the woman she later became. She didn’t come into herself until she & Charles divorced.

      Let’s not forget all the time she spent trying to undermine him & his family & without them she would have been just another Sloane Ranger

  20. juicyjackie says:

    I dont understand why this is even on the radar

    SHE ISNT A CELEBRITY

    You can have her if you want her, she costs a fortune.

    • maemay says:

      But she is not on the Civil’s list.

      • orangebella says:

        What about the stupid teen moms and jersey shore bs? They aren’t celebs! I would much rather read about her than them

    • Seal Team 6 says:

      No, she doesn’t. She isn’t on the Civil List.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        And what about that palace renovation, upwards of $20 million? And where exactly does her money come from then? Her parents? William? Surely she’s not living off her own earnings!

      • Seal Team 6 says:

        Who cares? She isn’t on the Civil List, and that was the point I was refuting. I have no idea what the Queen spends money on, and what part of the money is hers and which part isn’t, but Kate Middleton isn’t on the Civil List.

        I also don;t care how much money her parents may give her or Pippa. I honestly don’t even get why that would be a bad thing, for parents to give their kids money.

        I also don’t care if her cv is a big sparse, and it’s odd to me people make such a big deal of this, or that she “stalked” to get a Prince.

        I think it shows Middleton hasn’t really done anything all that bad, because people really pick apart such petty things about her.

  21. maemay says:

    I like Kate’s approach, she is not just going to attach her name to a patronage just for the sake of doing so. Already her charities have received worldwide attention. I think it is best to go at your own pace rather than do things to appease the press and those who would hate her with 5 or 100 charities. 8 months is not a long time, and she has said that her first priority was being a wife. Her first five charities are well thought out and personal. I think she is going to do just fine. I really love that she is going to be a scout volunteer, this is not just showing up but being involved.

  22. HoustonGrl says:

    Five is an interesting number. It is not as many as I expected, but perhaps Kate intends to become very involved with each one? But as one commenter pointed out, this is more than likely going to involve just a few mixers, parties, hand shakes, and speeches, rather than an actual “job.” Besides, she will be pregnant sometime next year. What bugs me is not so much Kate, it’s the fact that she will get oodles of adulation for not very much time or energy invested into anything. I mean, come one, she’s already being praised the world over for spending 13 months picking five charities. Too little, too late IMO.

    • GoodCapon says:

      There’s really nothing worth praising about her. We always have to lower our standards when it comes to Waity Katie.

      • JulieM says:

        Agree with both of you.

      • NancyMan says:

        Please don’t take this as being anything personal. I am intrigued. You seem to be quite critical of anything about the Duchess of Cambridge. Are you specifically being critical of her or the institution of the monarchy in general?

      • GoodCapon says:

        Kate in general. She’s a bad role model, she’s lazy, she’s work-shy, she doesn’t have anything happening upstairs. Regarding lazy and work-shy, people seem to praise her for finally choosing patronages when it’s her JOB to do so. I’ll wait until she adds anything more but for now, I am clearly not very impressed with her. In case you think she is the only one I don’t like, I also don’t think of highly of Carl-Philip (and her very classy girlfriend Sofia) and Albert of Monaco.

        Monarchy is a very anachronistic system, I like it and don’t like it at the same time. But I have to admit that I am very curious with its illustrious history and all the beheading and murders that go with it :D

    • Stubbylove says:

      Was thinking the same thing. “And to round it out to an even number, #6 charity goes to TAWRE: Those Afflicted With Racoon Eyes – this of all charities is most personal to the princess”.

    • P.J. says:

      Both Kate & William have said they want to be actively involved in their charities, not just go to a fund-raiser once a year. So the plan is fewer patronages, deeper involvement.

      What’s with this “too little, too late” comment? Kate is making a commitment to these charities for the rest of her life — probably the next 50 years! That’s not enough for you? It’s not like she can quit them once she signs up. This is a huge commitment, and this is just the beginning.

  23. dlovesc says:

    I love her. She is great. You guys are so mean.

  24. orangebella says:

    Once again no charities that have to do with animals. I’m glad she is doing good work for others but come onnnnn!!!!

    • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

      I think we could be even-handed about this. Everyone raises a huge ruckus and fuss when a poster is confused by someone’s (seeming) preference for animal rights over, say, children’s causes, so maybe this is a time for animal lovers to shake it off.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      @Orangebella-ITA.

  25. JulieM says:

    Well, I guess this is a start. I will believe it when I actually see her attending events held for these charities.

    First, though, she has to recover from her haute teepee New Year’s holiday, blowout 30th birthday party, and luxury ski vacation. That could take months!

  26. Ravensdaughter says:

    Top photo-total Breck girl! (yes, I am dating myself..)

  27. just a patsy says:

    Two things, first, the national portrait gallery does not need an official royal patron. Its a national museum. That would be like Jill Biden declaring herself Presidental patron of the Smithsonian. That’s no job, that’s just an excuse to go to great art parties.

    Second, Kate claims now that she paints privately. Well, publically, in LA, she and William made paintings with a children’s charity. Kate painted a snail. It was awful. She sucks.

    • P.J. says:

      @ Patsy — You may not think the Portrait Gallery needs a patron, but apparently they do.

      In the US, Joan Mondale, wife of the former vice president, is a commissioner at the US National Portrait Galley. Our current VP Joe Biden is a regent of the Smithsonian Institution.

    • Sandra says:

      Perhaps she paints in abstracts, rather than realism. don’t be a hater.

      • Snappyfish says:

        The smithsonite is 98% funded by PRIVATE funds. It needs all the help & patronage it can get to continue to exist. The median age of the current benefactors is 92 with not many coming up behind them.

        The European museums are a little better off with regard to public funds but only a little

        The Duchess has a degree in Art History. Well done young lady!! I think she is marvelous & the hate here is absurd

  28. TG says:

    Love her hair and those jaunty hats she wears. Well if she really does work hard 5 charities is a lot. But, I love reading about her here. Everyone’s favorite Waity. Just really wish she would go easy on the eyeliner it ages her at least 10 years or more.

  29. Suze says:

    Love Kaiser as the antidote to the absolute adoring press Duchess Kate is drenched with here in the U.S.

    Even when I don’t agree, as in this case. Those are some pretty serious charities. If Kate is actively involved, even as a patron, that will be impressive.

    As for the interview, yeah, well she sucked. She was very nervous (as would I be!). She’ll get better. Can’t compare her to William, who learned this stuff at his mother’s knee – and we know Diana was the absolute master of the sound bite and manipulating the press.

    • diana says:

      Come on! Kate showed her manipulative side when Will broke up with her. And her relationship to the press was the same then as was Diana’s back in the days.

      Also read this article about Will bullying a reporter into writing something nice about his wife: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2078175/Kate-Middleton-Im-sorry-getting-wrong.html

      Initially I didn’t quite get it. But she pretty much told the world that William’s people spoke with reporters to correct and manipulate Kate’s image to fit the bill. And that means yes they care that she is criticized and they do read newspaper and give a crap about people think of them!

      • Suze says:

        I believe that then-plain-old-Kate Middleton manipulated William to marry her, and that William applies genteel strong arming to the press to make sure his wife is well represented.

        I admire that, in a way. She wanted to marry him and she did. He wants her to look good in the public eye and he does what he needs to get that done. Eh…I’d do the same if I were either of them, frankly.

        I don’t think that Duchess Kate has a very good public speaking style, but, like I said, I bet she gets better pretty quickly. She’ll study it and learn it. She appears quite disciplined.

        I’m not really a huge Waity fan, but I find the whole scenario so archaic and fascinating at the same time.

      • Sachi says:

        @ Suze – You’ve got to be kidding me.

        “He does what he needs to get that done.”

        Seriously? You think it’s alright for William to pressure a writer to stop being so critical of his poor, sensitive wife because he wants Kate to look good and to always have her appear in the best light?

        How about if he encouraged Kate to actually achieve something more than just being his booty call? Maybe more people will see his wife in a positive light.

        If this were Obama sending the CIA to Rush Limbaugh’s doorstep to bully him into stopping his angry rants about Michelle Obama, would you also think it’s “right” because Obama just wants his wife to look good and that he uses his power to do so?

        I am just astounded at the lack of sense and logic when it comes to William and his Stepford wife.

        Royals should never interfere with the media and other people’s opinions, especially if the criticisms are not unfounded and there is valid information.

        William acts like a spoiled child whenever some bad press hits him and now his lazy wife. He can’t take it that not everyone is enamored of his choice for a bride. He abuses his power and influence into getting people to cower to him.

        I have no doubt that Kate will follow his steps whenever she feels the press is criticizing her too much.

        Now I wonder if Kate or William didn’t pressure the Palace into releasing a statement about Kate’s hair extensions being a scar just to shut people up about Kate’s thinning hair. Ridiculous.

  30. Angie says:

    I still like her. I’d rather read about her than loser teen moms and reality show morons, and definitely over C. Anthony. I can’t believe that was even posted. Awful. We have plenty of useless females in the U.S. who do NOTHING of importance. I’ll enjoy seeing how Kate progresses. I still feel sorry for her and all of the comparisons to Diana. That’s got to be hard to live with.

    • maemay says:

      I agree, besides Kate is harmless and she doesn’t go on TV shows and try to sell diet pills or some book she didn’t write. At this point when it comes to celebrities and actors I’m all about the British, even the dumb ones have more talent.

  31. Lucky Charm says:

    Glad she (finally!) made her choices, good for her, and for the charities. But I just have one question: how can she teach the boy scouts to cook while camping, when it doesn’t look like she either cooks or eats?

  32. TheOriginalVictoria says:

    Well, I called almost to the tee what her focus would be on the royal forums. I LOVE all her choices and am happy that she is at least getting hwr feet wet. I hope she really puts her all into it.

  33. RobN says:

    So after eight months she’s not as at ease with the cameras and interviews as her husband who’s been doing this for 30 years? Shocking and how dare she not be perfect at this from day one? The Brits are paying good money for her and she’s not perfect every single day. Good freaking lord.

    She’s a nice girl who picked nice charities that she’s actually interested in. There are plenty of nasty bitches out there who deserve all the crap they get; Kate isn’t one of them.

    • LunaT says:

      Well said! I don’t get people slamming on her. Like there isn’t anyone else in the world who was in a relationship for 9 yrs before getting engaged. I’m sure most of us would look like total dolts being interviewed. She’s pulling it off much better than any of us would!

      • diana says:

        she shouldn’t have to “pull anything off”, but she should have been prepared. is not about her looking nervous is about the complete nonsense she is saying. and i think many people would have been nervous but again she is not talking about a surgical procedure.

        and the cameras followed her for ten years. is not like you or me going from not being exposed to journalists and cameras to be followed everywhere.

  34. diana says:

    I am amazed on how little people actually do their own research before they speak. How they are willing to adore a “nice girl” without knowing nothing about her before 29th of april.

    I am going to say this one more time: anyone in her position would have receive same media attention, would look almost as good with the time and money she has put in her image: hair, body, makeup,…

    I am not going to believe for a second that this is what she is interested in. She creates a image. That’s all. Kids with problems and arts. As someone else mentioned above it’s menat to look “delicate and very nurturing”, it’s about the message she wants to send out not about what she thinks.

    But for all the causes she picked I bet it will be fantastic! And I am glad for that.

    That’s my story I am sticking with it.

  35. Benny says:

    I don’t believe she should get any praise or blame for the charities selected, because I don’t believe SHE selected them. They were chosen for her by whatever handlers are in charge of her. They should get all the praise or blame.

    I really think she hasn’t done more before now because they powers that be within the royal family didn’t want her to. I think it’s because they didn’t trust her to do a decent job speaking in public and not embarassing them. After all, she is such a doormat, if they wanted her to work before this, she would have.

    I think the first two charities listed are good. As for nos. 4 and 5 – the National Portrait Gallery and the Scouts seem like “I want to have fun” rather than “I want to work” charities, so she gets no moral credit for those. As for charitiy no. 3, the charity sounds good, but I’m not sure she is personally suited for it. Helping children learn self esteem, confidence and independence? How is she supposed to do that? She’s a doormat with an eating disorder. I’m not sure she’s the best person for this particular charity.

    So, a mixed bag. Two good charities, two useless charities, and one good charity that she’s not particularly suited for.

  36. Jayna says:

    Classy woman, who comes across very unpretentious. Great charities. Rock on, Kate. Ignore the haters.

  37. Amy says:

    I’d rather read 100 articles about Kate doing nothing but wearing nice clothes than read about the Kardashians getting Barbie dolls or their own dedicated magazines.

    That’s just ridiculous.

  38. anne_000 says:

    I laughed at the look William made at the very end. For the whole video, he wouldn’t even look at her, then at the end, he looked towards her but above her head & made that face.

    A far cry from the other commoner princess, Mary of Denmark, who speaks multiple languages, has practical degrees (Commerce, Law, Advertising, & Marketing), and a brain in her head. When she speaks to the media, her Crown Prince husband looks at her in appreciation and respect.

    I think if you put Mary against Kate in the game Jeopardy, Kate would be negative $ and Mary wouldn’t even have to bid anything in the final round in order to win.

    It seems to me as if the British royal standard for wives is to pick dodo brains who are only there for their looks, their acquiescence, and their wombs. Look at not only Kate, but Fergie, Sophie, and even Diana (though she became well adapt to handling the media later on).

    • It is ME!! says:

      Excellent points, Anne!! I just don’t feel that Kate should be held up as some kind of role model for women. She is just a person, and one who doesn’t seem to take interest in the world outside of her (like other European royalty seem to do). Again, well said!

    • eternalcanadian says:

      Quite right! It’s like William is either frustrated or embarrassed by Catherine when she tries to be intelligent or says something. That he has to lead her around almost like a child and the woman is going to be 30 in 4 days!

      That trip of them to Denmark to the UNICEF place with Frederik and Mary sure pointed out the issues with William and Catherine. William said he hoped their visit would raise the profile of the crisis in Africa, but all the visit did was show how inept Catherine was and how lovely Mary was. I think Catherine could learn a lot from Mary and also from Victoria of Sweden.

    • Sachi says:

      Mary doesn’t speak multiple languages.

      She butchers English regularly with her fake posh British accent (she once said her “experienced experience” has allowed her to have more experience), supposedly her mother tongue. And her Danish is awful after 10 years of living in Denmark.

      She also said in her butchered Danish that the “masturbating” Africans need help…live on national TV when asking for donations. She was supposed to say another word that sounds similar to the word “masturbating”, and said the Danish word for “masturbating” instead. What wonderful language skills. In interviews, she sounds nervous and breathless, and her words are often shallow or don’t make any sense, mixed with cliches and flowery words, like the lingo of a 20-something year old, not an almost 40-year old Crown Princess.

      She knows zilch French.

      Her ex-sister in law Alexandra knew multiple languages and speaks perfect Danish. Her sister in-law Marie also speaks multiple languages and speaks better Danish than Mary, and Marie has only been in Denmark for 3 years compared to the decade Mary has spent in Denmark.

      It was just the Danish Palace bulking up Mary’s CV to make her appear more accomplished than she really is. She never had a permanent job and spent her 20s-30s job-hopping from one entry-level position to another. She was never an executive at a company or a lawyer. She took Commerce and Law, she didn’t take a bar exam. Her job at Denmark was provided by Frederik’s friends and she was reported to never have been there except ONCE. The rest of the time she spent being Frederik’s booty call. She never accomplished much on her own.

      Sounds very much like Kate, if you ask me.

      She’s slightly better than Kate because at least Mary tries hard to appear prepared and organized. She’s that pretentious. But again, she’s better than Kate in that regard.

      If you want to look at someone who speaks very, very well for a Princess, look at Maxima of the Netherlands, who had to learn Dutch in a short time and speaks it almost fluently.

      Or Letizia of Spain, who was a previous newscaster and whose opinions are well-rounded and informed. She made rounds lately and gained widespread approval by saying that she supports same-sex marriage and LGBTT rights.

      Actually, any other Princess is better than Kate. But Kate is also new at this point, so time will tell if 10 years from now she’s still fumbling in interviews and still unaccomplished…or if she’s going to grow into her role.

  39. Sandra says:

    Hey, I wouldn’t be a cubicle slave if I didn’t have to be … but I would do volunteer work. I would also do it on my own timeline, not when others thought I should be out “doing” things. I don’t get the hate for her either – she seems sweet, she’s pretty, I didn’t think her interview was bad at all … we don’t know her and she’s given us no reason for the immense dislike. wow. Someone called her vapid – where does that come from?? She has a university degree, was interesting enough to catch and keep a prince and has family money behind her. Good on her – team Duchess!

  40. TheOriginalKitten says:

    God there are so many more *celebs* deserving of our vitriol than this chick. I just don’t get it..She’s so benign..

  41. boosch says:

    Sophie, the Countess of Wessex puts Kate to shame. Sophie has six pages of charities and had several charities already of her own before marrying Pr.Edward.
    The press only chooses to cover Sophie negatively when they do cover her, but Sophie has been a hardworker as a Royal wife and her charities love her. She’s been doing a GirlGuides charities for over a decade. She puts Kate to shame.

    4 or 5 charities is all Kate could pull out, the girl is a lazy idiot!!

    • Kate says:

      Um, there was a topless photo scandal just before the wedding, and Sophie was caught in a press sting basically showing off about her royal status and contacts in an effort to get a big money deal for her PR company. Which she had to resign from afterwards, and then turned out to have a ton of debts and went bankrupt. She and her husband live in a huge stately home, subsidised by the taxpayer.

      I like her, actually. I think the photos were taken years before she met Edward and the friend who sold them is a creep, and she was just caught out doing what most people with good contacts in PR always do. But it’s risible to pretend that she was this perfect figure. They’re all just people.

      Kate’s a bit dull, but she seems to be attracting weird levels of hate. Who cares if she had a career or not? And at this point, she’s just signed up to do some charities, and will probably do some more. I agree a year is insane and she should have done it a lot earlier – she should have announced this number right after the wedding, I feel, and a similar number more now, because her security costs us a lot of money and she needs to work for that, IMO – but it seems weird to see her get bashed so hard for the terrible act of announcing charity patronages.

      • diana says:

        what were you saying about angie/jen fans? and what were you saying about not researching enough on kate, if I have seen this comment before I would have not bother answering. you just did for me…:)

      • diana says:

        Kaiser we should have a like/dislike button next to share. so we don’t have to go all the time i agree, well done….

  42. NaomiCampbellsPhone says:

    Just to put this in to perspective, Princess Anne (or Princess Royal if you want to be all particular about it) is patron to 200 charities and organisations. Gotta give her credit there.

    • badrockandroll says:

      Princess Anne is the only member of the royal family that I would actually like to have in my home. I think that she is the brightest of the lot (damning with faint praise, I know) and she is a first class b!tch (something I admire. And I bet she is a hoot after a coupla sherries.

  43. XYX says:

    I’m afraid I don’t understand the logic that because Kate Middleton is not Kim Kardashian, she is automatically worthy of praise. If the highest compliment some of you can pay her is that she is benign and comes out on top when compared to THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR (KK), then that is hardly a compliment at all, is it?

    As far as I’m concerned, Kim sacrificed dignity and self-respect in the pursuit of fame, while Kate did the same, only in pursuit of a man with a title. I wouldn’t hold either of these women up as role models, but good on Kate for finally choosing some charities. Now people can praise her for something besides being benign and having shiny hair.

  44. katenotcatherine says:

    Waity has picked 5 charities. Hooray!

    Now she can go back to her palace and start the online shopping for the various parties that these charities will be hosting! Score!

    In all seriousness, I think the problem most people have regarding Waity is the dichotomy in what people see vs. what the palace wants to shove down our throats.

    If they presented her as William’s wife, and just that, nobody would care. Look at Princess Charlene. I may be wrong, but my understanding is nobody really hates her. They feel sorry for her, but there’s not the same kind of hate for her as there is for Waity. I don’t know what kind of charities Charlene is supporting, or what kind of work she’s doing, and I don’t really care. When I see her in magazines, or on blogs, I think “cute coat” or “nice dress”. I’m just as interested in Charlene and Albert as I am in Kate and William.

    The problem is they’re not trying to present her just as “William’s wife”. They’re trying to make her out to be this independent, modern and charismatic woman. The reality is, she’s none of those things. There is nothing “independent” and “modern” of waiting around for a guy for 9 years to propose. There is nothing “modern” about a woman not having a job for her entire adult life.

    The palace is they’re trying to make her out to be the next Diana. On a side note, it’s interesting, considering the palace hated Diana when she was around. Unfortunately, Waity does not have the same charisma as Diana did. Diana wasn’t conventionally beautiful, but she exuded beauty. I’m sorry to say that no matter how much effort and money as Waity puts in to it (don’t be fooled guys, a person who has a traveling hairstylist spends a ton of money on their “natural” look), she just doesn’t have that type of beauty. She’s very pretty at times, from different angles, but she doesn’t have “it”. I feel bad for her sometimes, bc she (and the palace) are trying so hard to sell it to us.

    That’s my analysis on the situation. If they want us to like her, don’t tell us one thing, and then have us see another. Don’t tell us she’s just like us, and then have her have her hairstylist travel to different countries with her. Don’t tell us that she had a “job” when we know she didn’t. Don’t tell us that she wears “high street” fashion when she hosts the Obamas, and then show us pictures of her wearing thousand dollar outfits to meet the poor. Just be consistent, and we’ll like her a lot better.

    • lak says:

      Exactly. Well said. This is the reason for my snark on her and the Palace.

      I would wager this is what irks most of her detractors.

    • Sarah says:

      I like Charlene too. She started her “work” independently from Albert a month after her wedding. Charlene is accomplished (Olympic swimmer) and elegant. I used to think that she is quite a bit older and that explained the difference between her and Waity. But Charlene is only 4 years older.
      How embarrassing for the royal family…and Brits in general.

    • JulieM says:

      Yes, katenotcatherine- Exactly so. You said it the best. The palace PR shop needs to stop trying to “sell” us Waity. She is a great big Zero. There is no there there.

      And Charlene is beginning to grow on me. She has already done solo engagements in spite of her newlywed status.

      • Sachi says:

        Charlene is also the Princess of Monaco, which equates her to Prince Philip. So really, she must do her share of work since nobody else is going to do them for her, and Caroline and Stephanie already have their own workload.

        Still, I do feel that Charlene is doing a good job so far. She looks warm and genuinely kind when she attends events about children’s charities. She probably doesn’t speak much French, but she doesn’t give a standoffish and cold vibe that Kate often gives off. She always looks like she actually wants to be at the events she attends, and her smile is always bright when she focuses on the children.

        She’s also not being presented as a down-to-earth style icon who just wants to live like the rest of us. She wears expensive designer labels because that is the image she wants to project and she and Albert make no qualms about their spending and are not hypocrites with their lifestyle. We all know they live lavishly, there’s no point making statements about living in a cottage by the sea or doing their own grocery shopping.

        The Monegasque Palace has not been into overdrive trying to push her as a role model for everyone to emulate. She just does her work.

  45. Luise says:

    Well said katenotcatherine!

  46. Molly says:

    I think this just helps to prove our case: she is forever more Lazy Katie.
    I was expecting at the very least 20. I was really expecting 50, but thats to much for Waity to handle with all her free time, but 5? FIVE? Really? She acts as if this is a full time job! I can actually think of many charities that I would take part in if I had that time that Kate clearly does. She is such a classless woman and her mothers “Latch on while you can” approach to life has clearly rubbed off on Waity. I dont know how we are expected to respect her for this. This is childs work. Of course, she is going to be praised as being “Just like Diana” when there are people out there who do twenty times the work Waity does. Shes pathetic and thats all there is to it.

    • GoodCapon says:

      It must be quite amusing for other members of the BRF, those with 200+ patronages under their belt, to see so much fanfare surround the announcement of Kate’s first FIVE patronages.

  47. eternalcanadian says:

    Five charities? Five? It took an almost 30-year old college-educated woman a year to decide where to lend her name? She got engaged in October of 2010 and now it is January of 2012 and that’s all she came up with? Geez, I’m not impressed.

  48. kibbles says:

    The media loves Kate so she will continue to be compared to Princess Diana no matter how lazy she is or what she does. Thank you, Kaiser, for presenting a different side of her that the mainstream media does not discuss. From reading the news stories on her in the press you’d think she was the reincarnation of Diana and has done so much for the people of Britain. Whatever.

  49. Sarah says:

    I think Kate will be a great patron for the brownies and cub scouts. You know, because she speaks like an eight or nine year old.

  50. Sunny says:

    For those complaining about the number of charities, Kate is actually a patron of 6 charities as she is a part of the the Foundation of Princes William and Harry. Let’s put this into perspective, shall we? Kate’s been a member of the royal family for 8 months and has 6 patronages. Harry’s been a member of the royal family for 27 years and has 9 patronages. Why the Kate hate? It’s so unecessary, all over being with her college boyfriend for 9 years (beginning in college) and ending up married to him? Nonsense.

    • Kate says:

      I completely agree that the hate is nuts, and have argued as much all over this thread, but to be fair, Harry has a full-time job as well as his patronages… and he also began his own charity. I think Kate seems perfectly okay, but she hasn’t exactly hit the ground running on the work front.

      Having said that, it’s amusing that people who hate her have the vapours over her uncle doing coke, but love Harry. I mean, if they seriously don’t believe it possible that our Harry has experimented a little with controlled substances, then I’d say they were a tad naive.

  51. PHD in Gossip says:

    Can we please discuss that she seems seriously underweight? That is a legitimate comparison to Diana.

  52. Amy says:

    I watched the video of her interview. She fumbled a couple of times and it’s clear she is not entirely comfortable answering questions on camera. But she did way better here than in the interview after she and William announced her engagement. She was so nervous then and William had to rescue her a few times when she didn’t quite know how to answer the questions. She’ll get the hang of it eventually.

  53. jwoolman says:

    Not sure I understand the Kate hate, either. Don’t claim to understand monarchies but I would assume her primary function (like Diana’s) is to provide an heir and a spare. Diana decided to use the media to spotlight certain causes only later when they were so annoying. Otherwise, I would expect that royal handlers are calling the shots and Kate must be right on schedule. Forgive me for laughing at the idea that the boys “have jobs”. They’re playing soldier, and their “charities” are all predetermined for them also. So Kate isn’t any lazier than they are. None of them have “real” jobs in the non-rich commoner sense. They play certain roles in their societies, that’s all. Here in the US we rely on getting twofers (politicians’ wives, but apparently not their husbands) for similar functions but it’s more chaotic. Same idea, though.

  54. jesssaysno says:

    I dont know why it is so important for her to have a job. She’s from a rich family and now she is set for life and doesn’t need to work or do anything. I don’t really care that she doesn’t want to work. She hit the life lottery (assuming she can also get pregnant) and if I were her, I’d be lazing around looking pretty all the time too.

  55. I don’t think Kate is so bad, to be honest. She’s no Diana, but she’s not a horrible person either.