The Queen was not impressed with Duchess Kate’s hemlines, hair & wedges


Katie Nicholl has written a fascinating summary for the Mail on Sunday of Prince William and Duchess Kate’s royal tour. As you may remember, Katie Nicholl is something like Duchess Kate’s unofficial biographer –I’ve long suspected that Nicholl has some serious sources in the Middleton camp, perhaps even Duchess Kate and/or Carole Middleton. Nicholl has gotten tips for years about Kate and even William, and the price for Nicholl’s access to the Middleton world is that for the most part, Nicholl is overwhelmingly flattering and she presses this “modern fairy tale” image. You can read Nicholl’s piece here, and here are some highlights:

*The watch Kate wore throughout the tour (even to evening events where it looked out of place) was a “£3,600 love token” from William. Will gave Kate the watch a few weeks before the tour. It’s a “stainless steel £3,600 Ballon Bleu de Cartier watch, which is embedded with a sapphire stone to match her Princess Diana engagement ring.”

*William also gave Kate a diamond eternity band as a “push present” after George was born. We’ve heard that before, and Kate wore the eternity band with her sapphire ring throughout the tour as well.

*George consumes everything and anything. He likes to chew on whatever he gets his hands on, from his mom’s hair to stuffed wombats. George is on a special diet though: “High-end organic fresh fruit and vegetables were delivered to the couple every morning and George’s Spanish nanny, Maria Borrallo, made fresh purees each day…He also eats the exclusive Plum Organics dairy and additive-free baby food – options include a Greek-style yogurt with kale, strawberry and amaranth. George’s favourites are spinach, sweet potato and apple puree, and broccoli with pear and raspberry.”

*Kate still gets up early every day to do yoga and Will and Kate “squeezed in a daily dip in a pool whenever they could. Kate tries to swim 70 lengths a session.”

*Will and Kate both eat a lot of organic fruit and granola, then salads for lunch. They both eschewed carb-heavy meals and they requested no cakes to be laid out.

*Kate’s “Dream Team” included: “Kate’s trusted private secretary – and near lookalike – Rebecca Deacon, 30, who is dating William’s press secretary Nick Loughran, the group also includes personal assistant Natasha Archer, 27, who helps with Kate’s wardrobe; fellow St Andrews history of art graduate Sophie Agnew, 27, who helps her keep on top of personal admin; and trusted society hairdresser Amanda Cook Tucker, 51.” Kate “insists” that they all call her by her first name.

*The “Marilyn Moments” need to stop, apparently. “Plans are afoot” from on high at Buckingham Palace to ensure that Kate stops flashing her beav everywhere. Nicholl says it was Kate’s decision to NOT add weights to her skirts.

*The length of the skirts was apparently a discussion topic between the Queen and Kate (and I would imagine a dozen courtiers). The Queen apparently ordered Kate to stop with the miniskirts and go for more refined, longer pencil skirts and such. Also: the word is that Buckingham Palace doesn’t care for the wedges. Ha!

*George’s tour wardrobe cost £700. Nicholl says Kate’s wardrobe cost £62,000.

*Kate’s hairdresser – who was on hand the whole time – charged Kate £6,000 (not including travel). Kate’s hair kept getting shorter too, because all in all, four inches were cut from Kate’s long locks. This too was ordered by the Queen, who thought Kate’s sausage curls were “drowning her.” Too true, your majesty.

*Kate didn’t wear sunscreen at all, so she got a tan and people were freaked out apparently. And Kate still does her own makeup, and Nicholl says Kate “applied it more heavily than usual.” I’ll say. Kate apparently uses liquid eyeliner from Lancome and her favorite perfume (these days) is White Gardenia Petals by Illuminum.

*The Middleton family has prepared a big welcome-home party for Will and Kate. James Middleton has been looking after Lupo this whole time.

*What’s next? Nicholl says that “after a fortnight of rest, William and Kate will be back on duty next month with official engagements.” They plan to move into Anmer Hall within the next month and “they plan to spend the summer ‘chillaxing’ there while George learns to walk.”

[From The Daily Mail]

I guess this is for everyone who claims that the Queen would never, ever tell Kate what to do. The unofficial Middleton biographer basically says that the Queen was exhausted by Kate’s miniskirts, Marilyn Moments and sausage curls and the Queen ordered her to make some changes. I wonder what the reaction was at BP when just a second after stepping off the plane in New Zealand, Kate’s skirt blew up and yet another commonwealth nation got to see Kate’s knickers. Well, at least the Queen is aware of the problem and she’s trying to do something about it. As for the “fortnight of rest” then a summer off? Sounds about right.




Photos courtesy of PCN, WENN.

Related stories

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

190 Responses to “The Queen was not impressed with Duchess Kate’s hemlines, hair & wedges”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I thought the watch might be a present from William, because she wore it so constantly, even though it was too sporty for some of the more dressy looks.

    Go Queen! Take charge of the Marilyn Moments, wedges and sausage curls! You’re the Queen, dammit! Lol

    • paola says:

      The Queen wears hem weights all the time. Oh god I’d love to see her having a Marylin moment and show some royal legs. That would be epic!

    • LadySlippers says:

      The problem will this article is Katie Nicholl is not always correct.

      She (IIRC) was the one who told us QEII was lending Kate tiaras and other jewels. That didn’t happen except for one small piece which was hardly worth writing an article about.

      There have been other false reports too. She’s good but not perfect (true for even the best Royal reporter).

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        That lying witch! The whole tour I was thinking, “where’s the jewelry? When do we get to see the jewelry? Surely today there will be jewelry! No jewelry. Oh. A watch. K.”

      • LAK says:

        I firmly believe that KN is the reporter they purposely feed bad information to weed out the leaks in their circle.

        Simultaneously, she’s used by the Middletons for pro-Kate propaganda. Ever since they started feeding her Kate information, her articles are so sugary it makes my teeth ache. It was a different ball game when she was outside the circle, she never bothered to hide her disdain for Kate.

      • LadySlippers says:


        I never thought about the fact that the Middleton’s might use her. Ouch. So is that why a lot of her recent stuff is not as correct as what it used to be? She still gets nuggets but she’s not that many. How has she not figured out their game?

        This article sounds too much like they were reading CB and picked up on all our criticisms. I mean, that article is the most consise summary of all our posts that I’ve seen. Ya know?

      • fairy godmother says:

        Nichol also wrote a book sort of outing the Midds for the long-term stalking they did to land Wills. So I am not necessarily buying what Nichols is selling.
        I am of the impression they use one another for PR sake. Too bad the Queen did not personally oversee the weights were sewn into Waity’s dresses. I have seen far too much of her over the years and being a rep on a royal tour is the last place anyone needs to get a glimpse of her privates-IMO!

      • LadySlippers says:

        fairy godmother,

        Can you explain your statement further?

        You said that you weren’t buying what KN was saying because of something she previously wrote. I’m honestly confused (no snark here). Why wouldn’t you trust KN?

        (An explanation — I honestly have read very little from her so have only the vaguest idea of her reporting style and ‘expertise.’)

      • FLORC says:

        I agree with LAK.
        And I rarely trust whatKN has to say anymore. Too often it’s wrong. When will she catch on?
        Much like Tanna i’m wondering if a boiling point will be reached and they write a tell all of the dirt they have.

      • L says:

        Exactly. The palace announced yesterday that Will/Kate would be taking over for the Queen for the WWI events in August. I’m fairly confident KN is talking out of her rear end and is just trying to stir the pot.

        QEII wouldn’t give up that kind of high level event attended by lots of heads of state if she was not impressed with the most recent tour. Flashing moments aside.

      • AM says:

        My own little conspiracy theory is that while I believe some of the things in the pre-tour reporting probably did come down from HM (get her hair out of her face, do something about her hemlines), an awfully convenient way for Kate to step away from her High Street Duchess constraints is to put it out there that it’s the QUEEN who’s asking her to spend thousands of dollars on bespoke.

      • LAK says:

        LS: I understand what fairy godmother is saying which is that despite the sugary tone of KN’s prose, she also wrote a biography which was released last year [? need to check date] in which she exposed Kate’s long term stalking of William.

        KN used to write articles that didn’t show KM in the best light. She constantly outed the Middletons’ shenanigans.

        At some point, she was cultivated by the Middletons, and her articles changed, seemingly overnight. She started to write articles that were sugary and complimentary to Kate.

        She hasn’t reverted completely, but it’s so sugar lacquered that it is hard to decipher the truth which lies buried somewhere in the articles.

        Fairy godmother is taking the view that we can’t trust KN since she flip flops.

        Personally i thing the 2 agendas aren’t mutually exclusive. KN burnishes KM’s halo and is trusted to give KM’s story in as sugary a manner as possible eg the tale of stalking becomes romantic adventure which was totes a coincidence especially as true love prevailed.

        KN is appointed official biographer of KM. win win.

        The only fly in KN’s world is that where William and Harry are concerned, she’s constantly being fed BS stories. She always gets it wrong there.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Thank you LAK!

        After I wrote the question I wondered if what she meant was flip flopping. It’s always better to be safe than sorry though…

        The sugary sweet crap is sickening.

      • bluhare says:

        She did wear one of the Queen’s brooches so at least one piece of jewelry was lent. Doesn’t mean that others weren’t lent; it just means we didn’t see any.

      • fairy godmother says:

        LadySlippers- I guess others got to answer for me before I checked back! Thanks everyone!!! xx
        Nichol originally toted the Waity Katie titled up until the engagement news broke. It seemed it did not take long after the announcement for Nichol to change her tune to pro- middletons. Both Nichol and Tanna were known to have had direct contact with Midds/Kate.
        There have been times I wondered if Midds used Nichols to try to shame or get their way in some instances. One would be promoting push gifts and Waity being given access to the royal jewels/tiaras as she saw fit. Just as this tour a push was made for jewels/tiaras to be worn. But that was not the case. One would think behavior and actual consistent work effort would be required to show Waity was deemed worthy of wearing the royal jewels. So I find it difficult to believe Nichols- she is not what I would consider as a reputable journalist. She is merely tabloid gossip.

      • LadySlippers says:

        fairy godmother,

        Thanks for the clarification. All
        Royal Loonies have areas where they need to brush up on and KN is clearly an area where I could I could use some improvement. 😊


        Thanks to you too!


      • AM says:


        In the case of Tanna, he was going nuts on Twitter when Kate arrived in NZ in that flight attendant outfit. Seriously, tons of tweets with the hashtag #doorstomanual. Three weeks later, he was clearly tipped off by the Middletons to catch them at that wedding in Scotland.

        I think they probably have a very complicated relationship with both KN and Tanna, part of which being Middletons have to feed them tidbits from time to time because they know too much. I think some of what KN writes comes from direct sources, some of it is conjecture, and some is just completely made up.

      • hmmm says:


        How does that make sense? If the Queen lent jewellery wouldn’t one wear it? I am thinking of the wattle brooch in particular. Imagine saying ‘no’ to the Queen! Imagine saying ‘no’ to luscious bling!!!

      • bluhare says:

        hmmm, trust me when I say that if I had access to HM’s jewelry, I’d borrow as much of it as I could! I don’t know that my comment makes sense, other than it’s obvious one brooch was borrowed so it’s not such a stretch to think there might have been the Australian wattle brooch as well. Especially as both brooches are very significant symbols for the countries which gave them to her and the Queen has worn them every time she’s gone to each country. Kate also wore the maple leaf brooch in Canada, so why wouldn’t she have had the Australian wattle brooch with her?

      • hmmm says:


        That makes so much sense, KN is used to push Waity and the Midds’ agenda. One possible item is to manipulate public opinion that Waity is deserving of royal rocks and other goodies and why isn’t it happening. Hence shame the Queen into bowing to pressure. Really interesting theory!

        Also, Waity’s clothes sometimes seemed really buttoned down (heh) on this tour- partially super conservative, but then partially hell bent on flashing. It’s like she’s conforming, but not really conforming.

      • hmmm says:

        Oh, great point, bluhare! Everyone has wondered about the wattle brooch. It makes sense that the Queen would lend brooches for each country. And yet….and yet…. I just don’t understand why Waity would reject it. It’s all sorts of wrong.

      • LadySlippers says:


        QEII is notoriously tight fisted with her bling. Diana got a few pieces but not much. Sarah, I think not at all and Sophie waited YEARS before she got anything. Charles inherited some stuff from QM and still went on a HUGE shopping spree for Camilla.

        My guess is Kate was offered the puny brooch and that was that. And QEII isn’t going to force anyone to wear anything — you can turn stuff down. It’s not like you’ll lose your head over an item of jewelry.

      • bluhare says:

        She did lend the fern brooch, and she also lent the maple leaf brooch. I think it odd she would lend both of those and not the wattle. But my opinion only, of course. I’m sure yours is much more informed, LS.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Notice it’s been only one rather small brooch at a time. IIRC, the fern leaf and maple leaf aren’t as big as the wattle.

        Also, this is pure speculation on my part, the wattle may hold more sentimental value to QEII and that matters too. Sentimental pieces rarely get loaned. Not even Charles has finagled those types of pieces from her for Camilla.

      • bluhare says:

        Perhaps, but why would she give her something significant for one country and omit the other? That doesn’t make any sense either.

      • Abbott says:

        Only reason I’ve started getting into Royal gossip is because I LOVE reading all of your comments. Two questions – since I’m playing major catch up – who is SquirrelBoy? What are RPOs?

      • LAK says:

        Abbott: RPOs = Royal Protection Officers

        They are from a branch of Scotland Yard called Protection command that provides security to Royalty, government and the diplomatic community.

        Squirrelboy = James Middleton

      • LadySlippers says:


        When are the Royals always logical?!???

        I agree as QEII could have given her something for Australia. Anything but my guess is Kate is on a short jewel leash.

      • bluhare says:

        Well, I’m going to have to agree to disagree with you, LS. I have a very hard time believing Kate would be lent something significant to NZ with nothing being lent that is significant to Australia. With HM’s noted eye for detail, I find the omission mind boggling.

      • LadySlippers says:


        I totally and wholly understand where you are coming from. And I agree — Kate should have had something to honour Australia with as she had done so for New Zealand.

        However, I wasn’t kidding when I said QEII is tightfisted with the Royal Jewels. This is the same woman who ordered her staff to call the British Embasdy in Paris *minutes* after hearing about Diana’s death to have them immediately enquire whether or not Diana was wearing any Royal Jewels. Both the British Embassy and the hospital staff were shocked at the heartlessness and lack of decorum displayed. Everyone thought it was tacky and it was.

        But we’ll agree to disagree my dearest Blu. 😊

    • MissNostalgia says:

      Next stop….getting rid of the wedges of doom and the goth eyeliner for all seasons!

      • fairy godmother says:

        AM- Tanna is a real head case imo!! Lol!
        He has so much dirt (years of dirt) on the Midds. If only he had the guts to follow through. I do not like him because of the way he uses it too. For example, he has serious dirt- real documents/letters that he claimed show Will used taxpayer funds to help out the Midds prior to engagement which included paying for holidays. Which holidays I do not know, but in 2008 Kate was given RPOs. How long for I do not know, but needless to say that only is permitted after engagement. It may be a reason why financial accounting is so secretive-?
        Additionally, Tanna went off the rails with twitter stating he had proof (photos/video) of Squirrelboy showing up to a wedding at the last minute and tossing his keys to the RPO to be his valet (car parker). I saw the photos before they went MIA. Will and Kate were there, but not for Midgletons!
        Even when that ridiculous book party for Pippa they had over stepped their entitlement by having a security sweep before Pippa, Squirrelboy, and parents arrived. And NO royals attended!
        No other people who married into the BRF has gotten away with the things this group has- nor has Tanna ever followed through with his claims/proof. In fact after the valet incident with Squirrelboy was reported I believe Tanna then was given a first or exclusive access for Pippa’s book launch. So these are all tabloid hacks who scratch each others backs for their own interests.
        Tanna was on first name basis with Midd clan and even supplied extra photos he took of them of their family/society outings for their photo albums!

      • AM says:

        I love when Tanna starts to go off the rails, like the time he tweeted about “one day the whole world will know what I know”. I didn’t know about the financial documents, that’s really juicy. Not only is he on a first name basis with them, he tweeted that George was a boy before it had officially been released. They are in deep with him.

        Generally speaking, I think things will get interesting in a few years when staff starts selling their stories.

      • LadySlippers says:

        fairy godmother & AM,

        First I DO so enjoy it when we get our tin foil hats on. It really livens up the place! 😉

        Second, tax payer funded RPOs come after an engagement, true, but Kate certainly isn’t the only girlfriend to have *privately* paid for RPOs. (*cough*Camilla*cough*)

        Also, Andrew is supposedly paying for his daughters RPOs out of his own pocket once they were officiously dismissed.

        *admires tin foil hat in mirror*

        I do look stunning don’t I? 😉 But I’m thinking a need a garish ornament to spruce it up a bit. Ideas?

      • HH says:

        @AM / LS – The way the paps hounded Kate, I understand the RPOs. Do you think that was a condition of them getting back together? How quickly were the RPOs assigned after they got back together sometime in ’07?

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Perhaps a stunning, bejewelled Corgie brooch?

      • LadySlippers says:


        Charles probably insisted on it himself. That’s my guess. Or was talked into it by William as William (IMHO) doesn’t yet have the clout (or the money at the time) to pay for the RPOs out of his pocket.

        And I don’t think Kate would have insisted. Just a hunch though.


        Really? I was thinking a bejewelled large horse. Or an elephant tusk (with the elephant still attached). Or is that a but too much????

        *tilts head in mirror*

        What are you ladies adorning your hats with?

      • AM says:

        Here’s my real tin foil hat question. I can see where Charles would have the money to pay for private security for Camilla, but where is Andrew getting it from for the girls?

      • FLORC says:

        While I stand by no RPO’s before engagement in Camilla’s case it was more of an issue.
        If that’s the rule it’s a rule. Kate certainly wasn’t shy about certain paps, but people weren’t also sending her threats. Camilla was a marked woman for all the wrong reasons.
        With that said, I understand RPO’s are better than a regular security team, but they shouldn’t be exploited like that since they’re tax funded.

        Fairy Godmother
        I love Tanna’s twitter! He’s such a child with how the others pick on him and his little rants. I wish he would just kick off some of this info he has. You know he’s drowning in info.

      • fairy godmother says:

        LadySlippers- My personal tin foil hat is a giant Hershey kiss! It is adorned with mini-kisses and easily replenished! Lol! I think you should personalize yours too! On Sundays for brunch I often wear my Martini hat!
        The taxpayers paid for making a secure wing in Middledoom’s new house- you know for when the royals visit! Ha! I do not think it is right nor was it right for Cam to have her Raymill house beefed up and secured when she is married and has many places to live compliments of the taxpayer. I also find it appalling when Cam moved in to Clarence House she had both her adult children move in too. Why was it done so secretly and the taxpayer expected to pay for every tag along and their living expenses, utilities, food, etc.?
        RPOs were part of Kate’s ammo- imo. Several years ago she once called Will complaining she was being harassed by the paps at the races. Her whining got Will to call in a pass for her(he was not there) to be secured in the royal enclosure- and it worked because that is where I saw her!
        I do not think Andrew is paying out of pocket for his daughters’ RPOs. I think HM personally pays for it. Andy likes his freebies- which is why his net worth was valued over 75 mil a few years ago!
        If Tanna would write an all-tell book he would be set for life and never need to grovel or be a sycophant again! Someone needs to! I heard Harry told George was to be a boy when he was at a bar months before Tanna leaked, but it would not surprise me Midds let him know in advance just like when he leaked a scan was going to be done soon before announcement of pregnancy. I can’t believe my brain stores this nonsense! So sad!
        If only James Whitaker was still around. He was one of the few who really told it like it is-

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Oh Slippers, dearest one. Please keep in mind that it is the bling that matters most, not the brooch. Remember, when one is a blonde with a delicate complexion it is best to eschew gold in favor of platinum, white gold etc, no? Now hurry along and schedule a sit down with Esmee over at Tiffany’s (no need to overspend) and do stop by and grab Good Names while you’re at it. She will keep you on message and I know you get all flustered and coquettish when Dieter drives you two about town.

      • AM says:

        Tanna tweeted and deleted that George was a boy after the birth but before the announcement. Just a bit convenient. Not to mention it was his partner who got Kate arriving at the hospital.

      • LadySlippers says:

        I’m forgetting who said what so forgive the lack of names as I address comments (I’m also on my phone).

        ~Totally agree that Camilla had more need of RPOs than Kate pre-engagement but there is a Royal bio out that states quite clearly that Camilla had RPOs that Charles paid for.

        ~Andrew was left money from QM and that’s what and how he funds his lifestyle. Not saying he doesn’t love freebies though. It was the Palace was the one who stated that once HM dismissed the York princesses RPOs (as well as the Wessex’s RPOs when not engaged in official business) that the DoY would pay for it if he so desired. But all monies for RPOs for non-working Royals would be funded by the Royals themselves if they so desired. Heck, look how much he forks out for the DssoY.

        My guess is Charles and/or William feared another Camilla/Diana situation with the press. And I have no problem with non-Royals having RPO protection and security upgrades but ONLY if every last red pence is paid for by the Royals out of their private monies. Tax payers should not be paying for that crap. (I’m also not naive enough to believe they don’t at least toe that line).


        You are such a doll. Turns out my tin foil hat cannot support a baby elephant. Who knew???? I am off to see the CB Royal Loonie Jeweller. I decided to go with a mixed metal, diamond encrusted halo. Stunning AND can pick up distant transmissions (beauty, bling, and functionality — what more could a Lady want?)

        GoodNames is meeting me there, shall you join us??? Anyone else care to join us too?

        fairy godmother,

        A candy hat? How ingenious! I might have to have one of those for myself. For casual events and such….

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Sounds positively yummy but I will have to take a raincheck. Mummy is having the Richard Sturridges over for cocktails and I promised I would join them because they are bringing their twins – asthmatic little Etonians withheadgear and epi pens, you know. Mummy loathes children so she begged me to come and keep the twins entertained and far away from her yorkiepoo.
        *sigh* So how about I meet you and Good Names afterward for drinks? I’m dying to see your latest baubles :)

  2. paola says:

    Honestly the only thing I would get rid off is the raccoon eyes.
    Other than that I loved Kate’s style on this tour and i even liked the wedges.
    I’m not sorry about the wedges at all. I love them. And I’ll say it again. I LOVE THEMMM.
    I don’t like the nude LK Bennett though.. and the Queen is right. The long hair drown her.
    The Queen is magnificent. She still has more fashion sense than many young girls out there ( Kate included)

    • someone says:

      I agree, other than the raccoon eyes I like Kate’s style. She did good on this trip, and while I doubt the Queen criticized her – if she did it wasn’t deserved.

      • FLORC says:

        While I also doubt the Queen said this it doesn’t mean it wasn’t deserved.
        We see editted photos of Kate. Her make up gets reduced and softened. How she looked to te people might have been very harsh. Then we see improved images of her.
        IF the Queen did say she wore too much make up she was probably right to do so. Kate does apply it very heavily.

      • hmmm says:


        Yes. Contrast most photos of Waity with those of Pippa at the latest wedding in that hideous coat. Pippa has very harsh looking makeup and face with double bags under her eyes. Why? Pippa did not look photoshopped.

      • FLORC says:

        Aside from the pics and links posted here some friends of mine did wait to see Kate and shake hands behind some fences. This 2009/10 sometime. They got some upclose shots of her and the difference was shocking! I had never known people to apply makeup in such a way until the TOWIE reference was brought up.
        Kate did have good work done on her nose and under eye bags. those don’t just vanish with age like hers did. Not all is photoshopped.

  3. Original Tessa says:

    BS. There isn’t a spy listening in while the Queen gossips about what she thinks of Kate’s outfits, and spilling it to the Daily Mail. Get real. That woman is a steel trap.

    • flotsam says:


    • Ayre says:

      I still struggle with the idea that people take Daily Mail “palace aide” sources as being anything other that complete and utter balderdash. I will also add that Katie Nicholl is not a “Middleton Insider.”

      She is, however, very good at Daily-Mail-speak, or what I call Mother-in-Law compliments. At first it seems like she’s saying something nice, but when you listen closely you realize she’s saying something not very nice at all. In the tradition of mother-in-law’s the world round.

      KM is not sending information Katie Nicholl’s way, because all Katie Nicholl does is passive-aggressively tear the Duchess down. She’s about as flattering to Kate Middleton as those wedges are.

      • LadySlippers says:

        The DM does seem to have an inside scoop but that doesn’t mean they don’t take an artistic license when writing.

        And even the *best* Royal reporters can get it wrong too. No one is

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        I want to shake your hand so much right now. I have known this also for quite awhile now. I am always shocked that people see her as a Middleton mouthpiece. Nicholl is as passive aggressive as any reporter I have ever come across.

        I mentioned here once that Nicholl was a friend of the princes – not Kate. She met Harry first who then introduced her to Will. A lot of people do not know this. Given the circumstances under which they met I have also wondered if Harry and had a bit of a dalliance in the past. At any rate I hope Kate knows enough to put some distance between herself and Katy Nicholl.

      • LAK says:

        Dame: It’s true KN met Harry then William, but she’s been papped exiting the middletons’ home, and since then, the tone of her articles have changed from vinegar to sugar.

        I don’t think that makes her particularly close to the Middletons, but she is the conduit for alot of information about Kate, written to promote Kate [and the Middletons] as much as possible. Sidenote – she’s recently taken to dragging HM into her sugary articles which i view as artistic licence on her part, but it helps cement KM at the heart of the royal family if people think HM is involved.

        As for the DM’s royal links, it’s a proven thing. It’s not as blatantly transparent as Richard Kay/Stuart Hill were for Diana and Charles respectively, but it is what it is.

        The Mail on Sunday’s editor has been known to advise the Middletons from time to time, particularly during Kate’s media tour 2007 and period leading upto the wedding and is the source of the horrid Aristos vs wholesome middle class Middletons articles.

        BTW: KN isn’t an idiot. By changing her tune and being so sugary, she’s is KM’s official biographer. She is trusted to spin into sugar blossom many a shady rumour eg Kate’s path to higher education which coincided with William’s path.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Snark & LAK,

        I don’t know *near* as much about KN as either of you so I kept my comments very vague because of it. (To be frank, I don’t know much about this at all but enough to know that blindly trusting KN isn’t a good thing)

        So, questions for both of you. When did KN get introduced to Harry and then William. Snark (LAK too), what makes you think there’s more to KN and Harry than friends? Is she the reporter that gushed about kissing Harry? When did she start being courted by the Middleton’s? And most important, when did KN’s articles go from more factual to fluff? Is the book(s) she’s written worth looking into?

        Thanks ladies!


      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        I see Nicholl as someone who sees her proximity to Harry, William, Kate and the Middletons as her meal ticket but I think that she personally dislikes Kate. I think the Middletons will shake her off as soon as they realize this. Nicholl knows not to ruffle Will’s feathers so she throws in only as much Kate snark as she can get away with. As for her sugary pieces about Kate being determined to go to William’s university, well, there would be fewer rumors if she herself wouldn’t fan the flames and talk/hint about just when Kate and Will met etc in the first place.
        Nicholl makes me uncomfortable for some reason.

      • FLORC says:

        Mother-In-Law compliments… So true.

        Regarding KN
        I wish we had more posts discussing her. She seems very shady with her motives and articles.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        So true. This would be awesome.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Nicholl met Harry inn the mid 2000s at a restaurant in Kensington. He asked her to join him and his friends in his VIP section. They hit it off and later Harry introduced her to William at a polo match.
        She is/was an attractive little brunette thing and I have always wondered about her and Harry’s interesting beginnings.
        I am not completely sure when Nicholl began to deal with the Mids. I suspect she knows that she has to get along with Kate in order to retain access to the princes so she makes the Middletons think they can trust her. She is laughing all the way to the bank, imo.

      • Ayre says:

        Dame, That is so interesting, I had no idea. I’m off to the internets to see what she looks like!

        She’s certainly a prolific writer, if not a trustworthy one.

      • Ayre says:

        FLORC, My mother-in-law and I actually get along really well and I STILL catch her in these comments. I’m empathetic; I can imagine it’s hard to see your baby shacked up with anyone. But on her last visit she confided that my new haircut looked lovely but it’s so odd that her son only ever dated blondes before me (my hair is very dark brown).

        I said, “Thanks?” :)

        My sisters have all boys, so I have forewarned them to prepare for eventual mother-in-law-dom. I tell them to be nice! :)

      • Liberty says:

        ….uh, what is she wearing????

        And more about how she does her work….from 2006:

        “Nobody infiltrates the velvet-roped sanctum of a celebrity party quite as effectively as Katie Nicholl.

        “‘I have climbed up fire escapes,’ she says. She sits in a corner of a fashionable coffee bar located directly opposite her offices in central London. She stirs her latte, and she smiles at the extent of her own wiliness. ‘I have clambered in through loo windows. I have made friends with bouncers. I know all the back doors….”

        This is from:

    • BeckyR says:

      YOu are so right! BS!!!!!

    • Olenna says:

      As soon as I saw this, I knew it was some ish, too. Reads like a DM typical headline.

  4. Jen says:

    wtf??? we’re going after a woman now because her cute dress (which is a perfectly acceptable length) blew around her legs in the wind?

    I feel so bad for Kate, she’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t, on EVERYTHING.

    • Amelia says:

      Yes, sometimes Kate gets a bit of unjustified criticism, but it does *not* take a genius to realise that airport runways are windy.
      Floaty skirt + wind = impromptu game of spot-the-royal-beav.

      • Jen says:

        Except there’s nothing to see except her legs. I usually can’t even read posts about this poor girl, because there’s usually 100+ comments criticizing literally everything about her.

      • LAK says:

        Jen: The main stream press and internet sites, CB included, only print/post the polite pictures of Kate’s Marilyn moments, including the one above.

        IF you haven’t seen the full set of pictures that show her bottom and possibly beav [i refuse to look too closely at that particular picture to be sure], then it looks like people are over-reacting.

        First time it happens, it’s an honest mistake. 2nd time, it’s a coincidence. 3rd time and a pattern emerges. By the 10th time, i’m firmly in the corner of people who say she’s an exhibitionist!!

      • Olenna says:

        ITA, Lak. I personally think she likes the attention. Her cutesy, flouncing dresses and Baby Jane makeup make me think there’s a little arrested development going on there at times.

      • LadySlippers says:

        I am not entirely sold on the fact that she gets off on flashing everyone.

        I think all her clothing choices and missteps show a complete lack of awareness on what it means to be professionally attired. Most of us would have learned about this right after college or however we came upon our first professional job. And she never experienced that and it *clearly* shows (even IF she worked at her parents company — she obviously wasn’t expected to dress professionally).

      • AM says:

        I think you’ve hit the nail on the head right here, LS.

      • bluhare says:

        I saw a photo of Kate getting off the plane in NZ where it was very apparent she does not wear anything under her hose. It was included in a write up on someone’s blog. It was probably just a split second view, but long enough for someone to isolate and distribute it. And, again, not the first time. Most of us learn from our mistakes; Kate apparently thinks hers will never occur again.

      • LAK says:

        Bluhare: Canada, Australia [on her way home from SA tour] AND that wedding she attended whilst pregnant all show clearly that she doesn’t wear underwear under her tights.

      • LadySlippers says:

        LAK and everyone else,

        I hate knowing who does and does not wear underwear. Unless I willingly let you in my bed or we get rip roaringly drunk and chat. Otherwise — it’s TMI.

        (Caveat: I do know that accidents happen, and as it’s been pointed out, we’ve seen a few too many mishaps to just be an ‘accident’.)

      • FLORC says:

        Regarding Exhibitionist Behavior.
        Hmm… Kate has access to slips and weights. She has used them too.

        I think it’s less that she gets off flashing and more she just doesn’t care. She’s sun bathed topless next to Carol and Pippa. It’s not an issue.
        What is an issue is she doesn’t see the importance of covering up for the lenses.

        And I agree with the arrested development. Completely.

      • bluhare says:

        LAK, I saw the photos you’re talking about and always thought she wore thongs or something so you could see her bum even if she did have a pair of panties on. But the NZ photo was from the front, which is when I realized that she may not have had thongs on before. Yikes.

      • LAK says:

        Every time she flashes, i always remember that allegedly her teen nickname was Kate Middlebum for her habit of mooning the boys. So she’s not necessarily an exhibitionist – we can’t know that for sure though evidence points in that direction, but i think she doesn’t care about the flashing because she doesn’t care if people see her body.

        All fine in private, not so good in public because what people tend to forget is that she’s a consort to a future head of state who represents 16 countries that aren’t all liberal, do-what-you-like type countries.

        Plus at some point she has to meet heads of state from Ultra conservative countries who will judge her more harshly than any of us can ever judge her. It’s simply the way of the world.

    • LadyMTL says:

      I agree with you that we shouldn’t “go after” a woman because of her clothes but at the same time Kate is not the average gal. She has – for better or worse – chosen a role where she’s expected to dress conservatively, not show her legs / breasts and so on. Putting weights in the hems of her skirts is a really easy thing to do and it would ensure that she wouldn’t have any more of these incidents…why not do it? She could even wear shorter dresses and not worry that a strong wind would expose anything.

      This isn’t the first time that she’s flashed people because her skirts are too lightweight, and I’m sure the Queen was not amused then either. I don’t think I’m attacking her if I say that I don’t think it’s appropriate for her to be exposing her bits and pieces. :P

      • T.C. says:

        I don ‘t mind the leg flashing it’s the upper thigh and beave flashing. That’s just trashy for even a regular person and completely unacceptable for someone representing her country. If Hilary Clinton ever did something like that, my goodness there would be an uproar. Kate does it not once, not twice but over 4 times in public. Show some class Katie.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I agree that people can be harsh on her, but in this case, I think she needed to be told to knock it off. This has happened about 5 times, and it’s totally preventable. It’s unprofessional and undignified and it captures all the headlines and takes focus off of whatever she is trying to do that day. She should have learned by now. I’m not saying she should be flogged or anything, just gently told that this is not acceptable. Do something about it. Weight your hems, wear an a-line skirt, wear a pants suit, wear a slip, whatever. Just stop it.

      • LadySlippers says:


        It’s honestly over a dozen times (before this trip someone had counted 13 — so a bakers dozen). That’s a lot in 3 years. Especially when you can count on one hand the clothing mishaps of the rest of the Royal women put together in a decade.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Oh, wow, I didn’t realize. Good grief. Pull it together!

      • LadySlippers says:

        Everyone has clothing mishaps every once in a while. The difference is it’s became a pattern with Kate.

      • CL says:

        Has it not occurred to her that her child(ren) are going to see this one day? I suspect that the future King Of England is going to wonder why his mother could not stop flashing people. Just think of the teasing he’s going to get! “Oh, I saw your mum’s fanny!”

      • Weegie Warrior says:

        No royals should be going commando when they’re on duty. End of story. (and I include Harry in this) LOL

    • HH says:

      “we’re going after a woman now because her cute dress (which is a perfectly acceptable length) blew around her legs in the wind?” YES. Just a few examples (but there are at least double this amount:

      To further the point, if you search “Kate Middleton, marilyn moment” you will see a lot of articles refer to the Australia incident as her *latest* marilyn moment. That’s how frequent it is.

      • CuriousCole says:

        HH: she’s flashed so many times that when her arrival in NZ was covered, one news site noted it simply as a “Middleton Moment” – Kate has outed Marilyn Monroe in the lexicon!
        I laughed when I saw said byline, does that make me a bad person?

      • HH says:

        @Curious – I didn’t know that! Too funny! It has happened to many times to just be coincidence. And you know what? It’s continually happening on the tarmac, exiting a plane and shaking hands. I mean, at least for the arrival and departure a pencil skirt would be tolerable.

      • HH says:

        @Curious – I didn’t know that! Too funny! It has happened to many times to just be coincidence. And you know what? It’s continually happening on the tarmac, exiting a plane and shaking hands. I mean, at least for the arrival and departure a pencil skirt would be tolerable.

    • MinnFinn says:

      I agree that we all have clothing mishaps once in awhile but I just can’t cut Kate any slack for the skirt fly-ups. For several years I worked in the heart of downtown in my city (about 3 million people). I wore dresses and suits every day. And five days a week I walked through a block of especially tightly packed skyscrapers which create incredible downdrafts i.e. one long wind tunnel. Not once did my skirt fly up to reveal my upper thighs let alone as high as to reveal my secret garden. I never sewed weights into my hems. I didn’t need to. After the first time the wind nearly knocked me onto the sidewalk, I learned to batten down my hatches and hold tight to everything while I walked that particular block.

      Also, Kate’s been flashing since 2002 when she was a model at St. Andrews. She paraded her fabulous figure down the runway twice. Once in white lacy bra and panties wearing just a skirt and a second time in that black sheer thing.

      • Inconceivable! says:

        @MinnFinn – your link is the perfect answer to anyone who thinks these ‘skirt blowing in the wind’ incidents are few and far between. I was amazed looking at all these instances!! Thanks for posting this!!

      • hmmm says:

        I had NO idea it was this extensive. I am speechless. She’s so vulgar. Thanks, MinnFinn.

      • FLORC says:

        I’d e to point out these photos are MODEST.
        In these shots and many others she’s full on flashed her full bottom and full front bits. Always in groups and not in private situations like the French Chateau vacation.

    • zbornak syndrome says:

      She just needs to wear a freaking slip! It’s not that hard it you want to wear twirly dresses.

  5. Loopy says:

    I always did wonder why she doesn’t put weights on her skirts like the Queen. I had to google Rebecca Deacon, the only resemblance is the brunette hair.

    • T.C. says:

      She likes showing off her legs which are her best feature and she doesn’t mind showing her biscuit. Otherwise she would have fixed the problem.

  6. Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

    That’s why a ladies shouldn’t wear thongs in public, the wedgies are inevitable.

  7. TG says:

    Now if only one of her trusted advisors was a makeup artist.

  8. Birdie says:

    Other female royals are never in the news for flashing something, so I don’t understand the problem with her dresses. Just add weights. It can be prevented so easily.
    Other than that, she looked great throughout the tour.

  9. Green Is Good says:

    Kate needs to “consciously uncouple” from the black eye-liner.

  10. Abby says:

    This sounds made up. But it’s still funny. Bravo.

  11. aenflex says:

    No offense to Kate, specifically. It just breaks my heart that she wears Lady Di’s ring. I’m crazy, I know. I just don’t think she should be wearing it.

    • justme says:

      It is now Kate’s ring. It was given to her by Diana’s son as he considered it a way to pay tribute to his dead mother on the occasion of his marriage which she would otherwise not be present at.

      Why shouldn’t she wear it? It’s a family heirloom. So is my engagement ring. It is a connection with someone important to my husband.

    • Christina says:

      I agree. With a piece of jewelry with that much baggage it’s sad that Diana’s legacy is partly spent on this unworthy person. But we need to remember William wanted to give it to her because he was too cheap to buy another ring – he hates spending money on Kate and gets things like teddy bears and plastic barrettes for gifts for her. His mother’s ring was an easy choice (even though it belonged to Harry not him). The eternity ring is probably the most expensive he’s ever given her.

  12. angie says:

    The queen probably doesn’t give a flying f*ck about wedges, and hem weights, but is more interested in how well Kate performed in her role. Sorry to be so dull, but…..

  13. littlemissnaughty says:

    I think people forget that the Queen knows her royal wardrobe rules and the weights would be a great idea but … the hemlines? Come on. The Queen is from a different time. Kate’s young, she’s got the legs, let her wear “short” skirts. I don’t even know if I believe we know ANYTHING the Queen really thinks or says behind closed doors. I highly doubt it.

    I’m not a clothes person and shoes aren’t my thing but makeup is an obsession. Which is why I HATE hers. Unflattering, woman! Ditch the hair person, wear a damn ponytail, and spend the money on a Bobbi Brown makeup course. Even the fact that it’s Lancôme eyeliner won’t save this.

    • LadySlippers says:

      It has nothing to do with being from a different time and everything to do with being professional.

      A great many conservative institutions ask all their employees to dress modestly. Period/ Full Stop. And the British Monarchy is the very pinnacle of conservative.

      • ya says:

        “And the British Monarchy is the very pinnacle of conservative.” Seriously? We’re talking about the family of Prince “I want to be reincarnated as your tampon” Charles here. The only way the British Monarchy can survive is through scandals to hold the public interest – I’m sure the Queen knows that.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Totally serious. That scandal you mentioned almost did in Charles — it was such a huge embarrassment all around (also to the whole Royal Family).

        The British Royal Family passionately dislike
        scandals. They like fluffy press that keeps the masses thrilled with them — something a scandal does not do.

    • HH says:

      +1 to everything LadySlippers said, but I’d also like to address this statement I always read/hear:

      “she’s got the legs” — That doesn’t excuse unprofessional clothing. I think because people find legs less “offensive” they don’t see an issue with this statement. However, let’s apply this to another body part:

      (1) wearing a low cut top — “she’s got the boobs”
      (2) tight pants — “she’s got the butt”
      (3) tight pants — “he’s got the package”

      As the saying goes with fashion: “JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN WEAR IT, DOESN’T MEAN YOU SHOULD.”

      Also to add: I think the issue is half/half. Sometimes it’s her length. Other’s just the lack of weighted hems, or pinning in the right place.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      I cannot believe that anyone would call her clothes unprofessional. They’re conservative and mostly boring. The skirts blowing up is one thing. Fine. I didn’t defend that. The “from another time” comment was in reference to the length of her dresses/skirts. WHERE are they too short??? This isn’t 1952. Which office in the entire Western world would frown on them? I work in a pretty conservative environment and nobody here would even blink. She’s not working in a frickin’ court room. Yes, I’m sure someone will come up with a workplace where her skirts would be too short, whatever. They’re not.

      HH: Legs aren’t “less” offensive. They’re not offensive at all. She’s not showing thigh so I really do not think that knees and anything below can be compared to breasts or a butt. Let’s not get carried away. “Oh you’re wearing a sleeveless top, why not flash your beave while you’re at it?” Apples and oranges.

      Of course people should wear it if they can. There are items of clothing nobody can pull off and some that are too small to be considered clothing in the first place. But if it’s not insanely inappropriate and you can pull it off, wear it. God, these “fashion” rules are exhausting. And again, her clothes are NOT inappropriate.

      • The Original Mia says:

        When she can’t bend over to talk to a child for fear of us seeing her throng, her skirts are too short. That’s happened too many times to count. There’s a happy medium between frumpy and professional and Kate has missed the mark.

      • LadySlippers says:


        This is honestly the first tour that Kate hasn’t had super short dresses.

        She’s had a *number* of engagements that had even the most conservative Royal-loving papers raising an eyebrow. The black and white Peter Pan dress she wore pregnant is always the first I think of. The British papers had a field day because she bent over and there was a child that could have A LOT. Like A LOT a lot.

        Diana was quoted (more than once) saying she had to be conscious of what she wore from *every* vantage point due to her public role.

        The dresses/skirts I’m referring to (as are others) were all mini skirts and not close to knee length. And a number of emoloyers explicitly require knee length skirts/dresses in their company’s dress code.

      • HH says:

        @LMN – Unprofessional attire is unprofessional. Whether it’s legs, boobs, butt, etc. They may be “apples and oranges”. As I stated, people find some less offensive than the others. However, saying someone has the “body” to wear something shouldn’t make it less of an issue or more acceptable.

      • hmmm says:

        Well, if you treat her like a celebrity, then you are absolutely correct. She can flash all she likes.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I feel like I’ve stepped into the 1950′s. I would really like to see these super short skirts because I cannot remember them. As for bending over, do you know how long a skirt has to be for her to be able to really bend over and not show at least a good portion of her thigh? Long.

        In my book, none of the things she’s worn have been truly inappropriate. You can always pick things apart and yell “inappropriate” when really, it’s not a big deal at all. Basically you’re saying “She needs to cover up, I don’t approve.” I hate it when people do that, especially when she’s very much covered up most of the time. She’s a young woman, this is 2014. Royal or no royal, you’re setting the bar for “inappropriate” extremely low. I work in a law firm. Show me ONE of her inappropriate outfits and I bet I’ve seen shorter sh*t at work and nobody was bothered.

        I’m assuming those pics a few years ago of William in a speedo were just horrifying? And don’t give me “not an official event”. There were professional photographers present.

        ETA: I’d love to meet these people who find ANY body part you mentioned “offensive”. They may have a whole different set of problems than hemlines. People need to relax. She’s not half naked for the love of God.

      • HH says:


        Exactly! I think in today’s media they are often treated as celebrities and people don’t realize it’s a “job”. Celebrities are their own brand, and as such, can market themselves as they wish. Members of the Royal family represent crown and country. Tons of perks and tons of responsibilities. When her skirt flew up in Canada, it seemed to be an honest mistake and I was embarrassed for her. All the times afterwards? Just ridiculous!

        @LMN – “I feel like I’ve stepped into the 1950′s.”

        We’re talking about Royalty in 2014. That in and of itself is antiquated.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Seriously? My personal feelings have zero to do with the assessment that many (not all) of her clothes are unprofessional. I

        n almost every job I’ve had (with the exception of my clothing related ones) I could not wear her clothing to my job. Granted, my employments choices have erred on the conservative side (government and financial institutions) which plays into my comments. Now if Kate were anywhere in the fashion industry, for instance, shirt skirts are perfectly acceptable.

        Different professions have different standard of dress. It’s just that simple.

        (And I’m not that much older than Kate so you can’t use that as an excuse either)

      • Francis says:

        Anytime we are seeing a future Queens crotch area or rear end or upper thighs or underwear, then her clothes are unprofessional….end of story.
        She did better this tour because the Palace forced her to lower her hemlines, but she needs to throw away the wedgies and those awful Jeggings, it just looks so cheap. IMO …and her hair needs to neater. I’m not saying cut it, just pull it back on royal tour. She looked nice at the reception in the white dress with her hair neatly styled back.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        @ LadySlippers:

        Yes, seriously. I have no idea where you’ve worked exactly but I know VERY few places (and most of my friends work in the financial sector or for consulting firms etc.) where the length of her skirts and dresses would be an issue.
        And yes, different professions do have different standards but where exactly do you get the royals’ dress code from? Is it written somewhere that her skirt can’t be xy inches long/short? No. This is your opinion on what is appropriate for her function as a royal. So of course it is about your personal feelings/assessment. Unless you’re spoken to the Queen, you just can’t know.

        I’ve said this before, the blowing-in-the-wind action needs to be rectified but her clothes are super conservative most of the time and the length of them is fine by almost any standard. Of course you cannot work in a bank and wear some of her outfits but she doesn’t have a normal job, does she? So why apply those standards? Nobody else in the worls has her job (don’t mention Camilla, nobody cares what she wears) so I have no clue how you would know exactly what is appropriate for her and what isn’t.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Over the years Royal protocol has been talked about in the press and by Royal biographers. When Diana separated from Charles she started wearing things deemed inappropriate and against protocol and it was most certainly newsworthy. Just like Kate’s clothing has been talked about by the press — granted right now you have to read between the lines but the snark is there — for the same reason. So the information is out there if you want to look and know where to look. And no, it isn’t that skirts or have to be X inches — it’s that they hit the knee.

        Again, my personal preference has nothing to do with it.

  14. Abby_J says:

    I have nothing to add to the article, but wee George in that red sweater and seersucker shorts? ADORABLE! Completely adorable!

  15. InvaderTak says:

    Isn’t there a rumor going around that the eyeliner is a tattoo?

    And yes yes yes to hemline weights! Why is that so difficult? I was at a local jazz festival this weekend and saw fewer hemlines blowing up in the Texas wind tunnel. It’s not hard to dress appropriately, especially for someone with kates resources.

    • LadySlippers says:

      The rumour has been debunked from several people.

    • FLORC says:

      It’s very much not tattooed on. Her eyeliner changes from the length, width, position in and out of waterline, and color. She’s also been seen without any eyeliner. You need to find a full screen picture and zoom in to see for sure.

  16. new here says:

    The wedges (cork no less) look like she is heading to a fun BBQ. Public role she needs more polish. Yes she is young but the wedge is too casual for official appearances. And it is clunky looking it brings down the airy looking dress.

  17. Jackson says:

    That close up pic in the blue suit is probably the best I have ever seen her look. And whatever on the Queen and hemlines and such – she did the same thing with Diana…or at least the press said she did.

  18. Helvetica says:

    I don’t buy this at all.

    I think the Queen is very pleased with Kate. She was born for this.

    • RobN says:

      I agree. Pretty, non-controversial, old enough to realize what kind of life she chose and not bitch about it. Doubt she feels the same about Cressida, though. I’d bet she worries about that one.

      • bluhare says:


      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Wife and mother of future kings? Worry about the ex spare to the spare of the spare’s girlfriend? Doubt that. Media comparisons? Reportedly Kate doesn’t read the tabs and it seems obvious that she doesn’t change her behavior to reflect public opinion. And if you’re referring to Isabella, well that story gets bigger every time it’s repeated. William isn’t going anywhere and the pining for Isabella angle has no legs.
        I just don’t see it.

      • Olenna says:

        What’s wrong with Cressida that she should give the Queen a reason to be concerned? She seems like a rather harmless, young aristocrat. I’ve never gotten the impression that she’s grasping for a royal title. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

      • Francis says:

        Cressida would be much more easily accepted than Kate within the Palace. The royals wanted Cressida’s sister for William as Queen to be, so the Palace is well aware of Cressida and all she brings, her family lineage and it’s members are already well known to the Palace Powers that be.

      • Olenna says:

        Thanks for the response, Francis. I didn’t think Cressida would have as many hurdles to cross as Kate and, unlike the Middletons, I haven’t noticed any obvious manipulation of the press.

  19. wow says:

    Hmmm, unless the Queen or Kate officially states that Nicols is an official biographer for the Cambridges, then these articles are still just typical media speculation to be taken with a grain of salt. I think the Queen has better things to be concerned about than commenting on Kate wearing wedges. She’s been wearing them for years. Lol. Nothing has changed.

    • Francis says:

      IMO Katie Nicholl has been used by Kate and the Middleton’s for self promotion since the beginning of the romance and even during the breakup used her column to browbeat William to go back to her.

  20. The Original Mia says:

    That eyeliner is ridiculous. Why is is so heavy? Can’t she see it doesn’t highlight her eyes so much as make her look like a raccoon?

  21. WillowDreamer says:

    If i was the Queen, her mum, sister, or even her husband….
    i would say to Kate….what do you want to be known for as a royal?
    When it is all said and done….that you were a flasher or
    that you were classy?
    Think about Diana…if her dresses were all flying up that is all we would be seeing for years in pictures and discussing instead we see her fashion sense and charm.
    I just don’t get her allowing her dress to fly all over the place. I am not
    in the public eye and i would not want my dress to blow up possibly
    risking the public to see more than they should. It Doesn’t take an
    Einstein to figure it out.

  22. MinnFinn says:

    I had believed (silly moi) that the Cambridges had a rather small staff consisting of Deacon for administrative work plus household staff (nanny and cleaner/dogwalker/cook). I also thought Charles’ office handled their PR and that security of course came from Scotland Yard.

    So does anyone know if Kate’s assistants Archer and Agnew are full-time?

  23. FrostedOne says:

    I’m loving all these comments ( and new to this site/app)! Do I need to officially sign up or in? Or just do this everytime, as in name, email and comment? I see some have personal pic’s or post without…Help! LoL

  24. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Does anyone here wear pins in their clothes? I’ve always wondered about them — do they leave noticeable holes in the clothes? Kate has pins in her red and blue coats in these pics, and it made me wonder. Not a very important subject, I know . I’m just curious.

  25. AC says:

    How come there is no eternity band if she wore it the whole trip? I want to see!

  26. jwoolman says:

    The Queen seems rather too busy to be obsessing as claimed. I can believe her making suggestions occasionally, she’s Kate’s grandmother-in-law after all. But I doubt she’s too bothered.

    • bluhare says:

      This is a woman who thinks using the word “toilet” is disgusting! Of course she’s going to care how a woman represents her. That’s the key. Kate and William are representing the Queen, not going on a tour as The Kate and Willy Tour of New Zeastralia.

  27. peaches mcdooby says:

    well i love all 3 of them, i find them a breath of fresh air and sweet.

    i could just eat that baby George up he is so cute

    Kate has a beautiful figure, like Diana, she should show it.

    and Will is a fine gentlemen. Perfect poise and princely manner.

    i’ve never been a huge Royal follower, but i actually watched what these guys .

  28. Francis says:

    I agree , KN is a source go to for the Midds clan and Kate. I have believed that from the beginning of the whole dating thing.
    Does anyone recall when Kate and William were on vacation and supposedly no one in the press knew exactly where they were , but somehow KatieNicholl managed “somehow” to ring either Kate’s phone when she was sitting w William in the room or the room phone and Kate conveniently answered, I think Kate pretended to be shocked by the call, William was evidently sitting in the suite with her, so what else could she do but pretend to be shocked. I always found that incident a real tell about Kate and KatieNicholls or the Daily Mails access to Kate.

    As far as Kate’s figure, I think she’s must look skeletal in person. When her skirt blew up her legs were awful , terribly thin.

    • sad says:

      Re: your last sentence — good to see someone else has actually noticed this and commented on it. A lot of people are either oblivious to it and are not aware of the dramatic weight loss or they see it as a good thing and applaud her “awesome” figure. What a world we live in…

    • LAK says:

      i remember that phonecall…..

      William is either really dumb or completely hoodwinked if he doesn’t know how close these people were/are to the press.

      every single talking head programme during the engagement kept repeating how much Kate and the Midds were discreet and never, ever talked to the press meanwhile there is 8yrs worth of press articles that can be linked to them…..

      • Suze says:

        Gotta tell you – I love all those rocks!

      • AM says:

        There was the time she and James were papped (by Tanna, no less) on Christmas holiday playing tennis. William was ready to call in the lawyers and Kate had to persuade him to leave it be. William must know by now or is deeply, willfully ignorant.

  29. Ren says:

    I have only two things to suggest for Kate.

    1. Ask one of your designers to create some beautiful, bespoke slips, half slips and tap pants. Or for Pete’s sake – ever heard of a lining? Then you can let the wind blow. A little bit of lace can be a fantastic thing. Don’t young ladies wear slips or tap pants anymore? They used to be everywhere and just lovely. And they feel good, too. Everyone I knew wore tap pants under our minis. We never went out without something on under our skirts. It’s just common courtesy.

    2. Do something with your hair on windy days. Put it up, pull it back, put a headband on it, but please stop letting it fly all over the place. Diana never would have allowed herself to look so messy.

    Other than those two things, I think she is the greatest addition to the Royal family. She and William bring such joy and energy to their duties. It’s been so much fun checking out the clothes, etc. And Prince George. What a doll.

    • Hazel says:

      Tap pants! Yes! Those are wonderful! I haven’t seen them in stores lately, but then again, I haven’t been looking…and, like you say, she can have some wonderful silk things made for her!