Carole Middleton doesn’t care if you think she’s ‘an arriviste or a social climber’


There’s an interesting story in The Daily Beast this week about Carole Middleton, the mother of a future queen and the grandmother to a future king. It’s Carole’s relationship to Prince George that seems to have kick-started a renewed interest in Carole – it was just last week when some “paparazzo” was tipped off about Carole’s whereabouts with Prince George, and the photos were sold to the American site PopSugar. The Daily Beast article is mostly about how William and Kate’s parenting choices are being revealed by their insistence that George and Charlotte have a close relationship with the Middleton side of the family, often to the detriment of their relationships with the royals. Some interesting notes:

George and Charlotte will have middle class values: “It is Carole Middleton who is shaping much of [George’s] world with her middle-class values of hard work and fair play, not the ossified Windsor culture of privilege.”

Charles’ pain: “William and Kate’s rejection of Charles as a formative influence for George has been painful for him, but it is clearly Carole whom William and Kate believe will instill the right values in the future King.”

No one says “Doors to manual” to former stewardess Carole anymore: “Carole’s pretty hard to faze,” says one acquaintance. “She never really cared about the whole ‘doors-to-manual’ thing. You don’t build a business like she has being a sensitive flower. She is also deeply practical. That’s why Kate likes having her around so much—she just takes care of all the details.”

Michael Middleton was the beneficiary of a significant trust: The Daily Beast credits this trust with still “paying an income to this day and almost certainly paid for Kate, Pippa and James’s private education, at least until their parents’ business took off.”

Carole is unembarrassed by her working-class roots. “Carole is untroubled by self-doubt,” says a friend. “She couldn’t really care less if people think she is an arriviste or a social climber. Her focus is all about Kate, William, George, and Charlotte.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Yeah… I still have questions. While I think Carole is a great example of someone from a working class background fighting tooth and nail to become upper-middle-class, to the point where she’s married her oldest child off to the heir to the throne, I still find fault with some of Carole’s methods. She’s organized and hard-working and good for her, but she raised a pampered, spoiled daughter who can barely function as an adult without her mommy’s intervention. Also, I love how the explanations for the Middletons’ wealth changes year by year. The Middletons’ finances are kind of sketchy, just my opinion.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, Getty.

Related stories

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

213 Responses to “Carole Middleton doesn’t care if you think she’s ‘an arriviste or a social climber’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. NewWester says:

    If Carole is so “middle class” why does she need someone to hold her umbrella?

    • Olenna says:

      IKR, and that comment about her shaping [George’s] world with her middle-class values of hard work is ridiculous. She should have applied this strategy to her own children who seem to flit from one fanciful job to another, or just not work at all.

      • Size Does Matter says:

        I was thinking the same – daughter can’t function as an independent adult in a palaceful of assistants, so maybe the “middle class values” skips a generation, like freckles or something.

      • Jenna says:

        That’s what I thought too–out of three children, the only one she seems to have raised with ANY kind of work ethic is Pippa.

      • Katydid20 says:

        Agreed, George should be learning about hard work from his own parents, which he clearly won’t be. Carole needs to give Kate a good kick in the rear……

    • Joy says:

      Does middle class mean something different over there? Because in America it means “not super poor”

      • Lara K says:

        I think in this case “middle class” means sketchy wealth and overwhelming ambition to marry up…. just based on the example provided.

      • LAK says:

        American definition of class is different from British definition of class.

        The american definition seems to be derived from wealth whereas the British definition is a much more fluid, less extreme version of the indian caste system. The british definition isn’t tied into wealth though money helps.

        In the past, each class had very distinct ticks that helped identify them at a glance, but these days, we are a much more fluid society, thus it is harder to pin point.

        The different class ticks are the stuff of literature and caricature, but I think the film MY FAIR LADY does a great job in explaining the peculiarities of the British class system.

      • als says:

        @Joy – Yes, it means the same where I live too which is also outside of UK. LOL

        Also, no arriviste will ever be bothered with being called an arriviste, they are by definition insensitive to name-calling and judgements. One could say they are examples of determination but they could use their determination to better goals.

        It’s strange that this article creates the image of a shrewd businesswoman not a loving one that spoils her kids and grandkids rotten. So, if she is good at taking care of the family, family must be business.

      • Sixer says:

        What LAK said.

        You have to think of social class in the UK being a combination of economic status, “breeding” and trashy vs the other sense of classy. It’s a mix of all those things. Plus, the idea of being “posh” is also a relative term. Posh really means “posher than me”. It isn’t a fixed definition.

        Also, average Britons are much less concerned with class than Americans enjoy imagining.

      • Sarah says:

        Middle class seems to mean poorer than the Windsors. Which would be just about everyone except Richard Branson.

      • frisbeejada says:

        I don’t think we are anywhere near as fixated with our own class system as other people are. The ‘class system’ is part of the British stereotype along with queuing, brolly’s, football hooligans and possibly even bowler hats. I don’t recognise my own country from some of the comments about ‘caste’ I have read on this site. But then how many other nationalities recognize themselves from their own national stereotype? Not many I’ll be bound.

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        Read Class by Jilly Cooper. She wrote it ages ago, but the basic definitions of the UK class structure remain largely accurate.

      • frisbeejada says:

        ‘Class’ was written 35 years ago – a generation in fact, and it was a satire.

      • Sixer says:

        BearcatLawyer – that book has about as much in common with the UK of today as Downton Abbey does.

        Frisbeejada – yes, but you don’t mind because of our vastly superior sense of humour. Snigger.

      • frisbeejada says:

        @ Sixer yes you’re right – I always take my brolly and bowler to the football where I indulge in beating the opposition over the head in true hooligan fashion – whilst also wearing Woad and a tartan loin-cloth – obviously . And talking about a sense of humour – I snorted tea down my nose imagining Rick Mayall reading FSOG tweets – I’ve now moved on to Ardal O’Hanlon/Father Dougal and I haven’t even read the flaming books!

      • LAK says:

        Speaking of Jilly Cooper, the Rupert Campbell Black character in her Riders/Polo/Rivals/Jump series is based on Andrew Parker Bowles.

        He didn’t age well, but my goodness he was a looker when he was a young man. And apparently a serial shagger that the entire set was after.

      • Citresse says:

        Well, old money is usually tied to being much more down to earth. Old money often times wants value instead of appearance. Not cheapness, don’t be confused.

      • frisbeejada says:

        @ Sixer – Edit should have read ‘Yes you’re right – I am that stereotype’ – dratted computer.

      • Maia says:

        I thought that Snobs by Julien Fellowes had a good commentary on the class system in the UK.

      • Sixer says:

        Maia – Snobs is another satire. It’s mocking the rump of the old aristocracy for hanging on to a class structure that doesn’t exist any more. This is not to say that Britons aren’t more conscious of social class than Americans because in some ways they are, but really 99% of it is in the American imagination. Aside from that tiny rump of twits headed by the Windsors, nobody in Britain goes about thinking of themselves in terms of class, unless it’s to take the proverbial. Ha. There goes that sense of humour thing again!

      • Liberty says:

        LAK and Bearcat! Ha, I own and love every Jilly Cooper novel in the Riders/Polo series. Rupert and Taggie forever! I’m “read up” through Wicked and Jump! There is something about the ballsy characters and humor I love, even if outdated.

        And is there ever a better embodiment of nasty work than Rannaldini? Meanwhile my college roomie one summer in a house I shared was full-on Hermione.

        I read Class, and only related to it in one way (I am not from the UK, just work there on and off w clients and travel etc., so I am not versed like LAK, Sixer, etc.) — that I have a rich eccentric Brit client who has buddied around with Prince Charles since their school days, and there is a small bit in there that applied to this man, at least, and w a few cocktails, he will tell you this himself, lol.

      • belle de jour says:

        Best smartypants analysis of class in America I’ve ever read:

        “Class: A Guide Through the American Status System,” by Paul Fussell.

        It’s critical, cultural, economic + semiotics analysis, very readable, and an excellent guide on the inherited similarities & later divergences of the class structure here.

      • Maia says:

        So Sixer, are you saying that the boundaries that Snobs talks about : the little cliques of the aristocrats with their barriers to entry – that does not exist as much among the current young (say <30 year old) dukes and earls ? Are they more welcoming of outsiders? Perhaps so, because Emilia Jardine Patterson (aristocrat) was best friends with Kate (non-aristocrat) growing up.. so some permeability must exist.

      • LAK says:

        Maia: They say it’s much easier for children to cross the boundaries if they are educated at the same establishments because they pick up the nuances better than the adults. That’s the reason Ma Midds sent her kids to particular school.

        There is a story floating around that demonstrates Carole’s alleged encouragement of her kids’ social climbing where by a bunch of school mates had a sleep over at the Middleton home only to discover that only the titled aristo girls had been invited. It puts Emilia and Kate’s school time friendship into perspective especially when you know that Emilia grew up with William and Harry and thus facilitated William and Kate’s first meetings.

        Overall, what everybody hates is people who visibly try too hard like the middletons to upgrade their class. It brings mockery. People are more accepting if you don’t try or appear to try.

        Sixer: all those books and films are satire, but they are a great way of explaining the class system. Stupid stuff like toilet vs loo, settee vs sofa, supper vs dinner. The reason ‘doors to manual’ was such an effective put down of Kate. Do you remember when people were appalled that Carole visibly chewed gum during William’s passing out parade? Or the mockney era which was really inverted snobbery?

        Liberty: I love, LURVE Jilly Cooper. Rupert and Taggie 4evah!!!! On a royal note, I always think Camilla is a Jilly Cooper character come to life.

      • Sixer says:

        Maia – um… no, that’s not really what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that there is a TINY, TINY number of aristos in their own little clique, perpetuating their anachronistic exclusivity within their group.

        But that to extrapolate that into Britain still being a class obsessed society would be wrong. 99.9% of Britons don’t go around thinking about themselves in terms of class or interact with others on the basis of class, as Americans seem to think they do.

        Also, that tiny rump of aristos aren’t the people who have power and influence in the UK. That group of powerful people would be exactly the same group as they are stateside – the corporate bosses and captains of industry.

        See what I mean?

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        Oh Class has satiric elements for sure and may not have aged like a fine wine, but I think much of what Jilly Cooper wrote about the UK class system still has merit. The devil is likely in the details, but she got quite a bit of the big picture right, imho. BTW, although I was born in Texas, my mother is British and my father is Canadian and I spent half my childhood in England and Europe. So I have seen firsthand how the class systems of the US and the UK are alike…and how they differ.

        I LOVED Snobs too as well as Past Imperfect. Julian Fellowes really should write more novels!

      • MinnFinn says:

        So for the Britons who post here, do you think Kate Fox has good insight about class in Britain in her book “Watching the English, The Hidden Rules of English Behavior” ?

        I thought I had learned a lot from the book and from a few of her newspaper articles. But Sixer, Frisbeejada and LAK you are casting doubt on that.

        I know it’s after midnight in the UK, but hopefully some of you will respond. Otherwise I’m going to re-post this again tomorrow.

      • Liberty says:

        LAK: you know, I never thought of it but yes, now I totally see Camilla in that way! She would be an old school friend of Monica Baddingham, perhaps?

        And for Harry, we need to hope a grown Caitlin O’Hara shows up! Someone with a little spirit and brains and kindness too!

      • LAK says:

        MinnFinn: Kate Fox gives a more general societal overview whilst the books we’ve quoted are more specific at explaining a very small section of english class.

        This is why the british class system is so confusing because all these writers are correct. Some of the old rules still apply, but many keep changing.

        I think that’s why the middletons are routinely mocked. Everybody else has moved on, or tried to, and they’ve stuck to the old ways and pander to the old system. They could be a featured in the book ‘snobs’ or ‘class’.

      • Sixer says:

        MinnFinn – I think LAK is right. You still see the old aristos footling around with their anachronistic mores – the ones about foxhunting always stick out to me the most. But they do that WITHIN their little group, you know?

        In economic terms, Britain is unequal in exactly the same way the US is unequal and, in fact, Britain is marginally more socially mobile than the US, in defiance of each country’s stereotype. But basically, economic class in the two countries is virtually indistinguishable. We’re pretty much the same.

        But in social terms, the 99% in Britain look at the aristos as a kind of vaguely ridiculous stereotype – annoying/amusing but part of the national culture. The 99% don’t see themselves as inferior, or behave deferentially. The 99% don’t think about social class much at all, and they certainly don’t define themselves by it, or consider who they do or don’t interact with in terms of social class.

        What I’m trying to get across is that, in contrast to the stereotype imagined by Americans, social class is not a conscious factor in the lives of the vast majority of Britons.

      • Sixer says:

        Ok, perhaps this explains what I’m trying to say better. 75% of Britons describe themselves as middle class – pretty much the same proportion of Americans describe themselves as middle class. And this is what Britons see as the strongest class determinator: 23% education, 21% parental social class, 20% occupation, 20% income level. So only 1 in 5 Britons feel that class is basically inherited.

        If you want to understand how Britons think of themselves in terms of social class, all you have to do is think about how Americans think of themselves in terms of social class. Because it’s basically the same, just with a few minor differences in terminology.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        Lots of interesting comments. I grew up in the countryside in Scotland where, unfortunately, there still is this “them and us” mentality which is incredibly stifling and archaic. Times have changed in the 20+ years since I’ve lived in the UK, but class distinction still exists to some degree, although it’s rarely discussed. Many of us (my generation) fled from it, but many more stayed and became just as stuffy as their predecessors, which is a shame. Many a rogue – and many a fool – has hidden behind an old name and/or old money believing themselves to be above reproach, and, in some instances, above the law. Thugs in tweeds with dastardly good manners, still pillaging the land.

        America has its own class system which is largely based on wealth alone, therefore easier to decipher. Any class system should be unnecessary in the 21st century though, imo. Humans should have evolved beyond those shenanigans by now.

      • MinnFinn says:

        Thanks for your insights, Sixer, LAK, Loch. If I understand correctly, in general you all would say that Kate Fox’s views on class apply to some aristos and others but certainly not a majority of the UK. That is what I thought you would say but I’m glad I asked.

        You are correct that in general class in the U.S. is based on wealth. But similar to the UK and anywhere in the world, the U.S. has a variety of class systems. In the Silicon Valley where I worked for a dotcom for several years, the key to upper class membership used to be an advanced degree, ideally a STEM PhD and not just a masters. Drive an hour away to San Francisco circa 2000 and long-time SF uppers despised the tech industry as did the creatives. Their perjorative terms for them — dotcommies and e-holes.

        In other class systems in the U.S. a person might be deemed lower class for poor grammar or liking country music or NASCAR. And I was shocked when a dear friend said anyone from the deep south would be considered lower class in his home city of Richmond VA.

      • Sixer says:

        MinnFinn – exactly! It’s much the same – full of idiosyncrasies and local mores but if you look at the big picture, most UK and US citizens see class in broadly the same terms. I see the BRF and the aristos as a slowly declining rump of class attitudes who are testament to a country with a long history – and who clearly would be missing in the overall picture of a young country like the US. But the existence of that rump doesn’t really affect the way British people see themselves.

      • FLORC says:

        It’s terrible that class system can be so sweeping simply by geographic location.

        And right about our class systems. The job you hold, area you live in, accent you speak with, etc… I’ve been on both ends of it and always bewildered by it. FMORC has to explain it to me sometimes. Though other times (and imo the majority) people judge based on you. Nothing else. Just how they get along with you.
        It’s a case of the few casting such a large shadow imo.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        Sixer: “The rump.” So funny, and a perfect description. So glad my mother was bold enough to do her own thing and escape. Hopefully it’s in its death throes, or will be within a couple of generations as the Old Guard pop their clogs.

        Minnfinn: It’s really appalling that it’s extended itself like the tentacle of an octopus over here. Much more so because the Constitution was set up to free the populace from any such tyranny.

  2. Sayrah says:

    I so don’t get the disdain for this royals or the middletons. Yawn

    • Susan1 says:

      I like the Middletons, from what i can see of them. They work hard. They raised two daughters. The mother and daughter are close. The daughter was willing to be Queen. Not everyone is…. She hung in there. Everybody gives her a lot of hate for lack of working, but I am not too quick to judge as I think just being married to William and having to handle the Royal family is a job in itself. Much less to have had a great deal of pressure to have a boy heir (even if a girl could have inherited, you know they wanted the boy) quickly and then to have the spare. Pregnancy was not a piece of cake for her. Being wealthy and especially being wealthy and royal doesn’t automatically make life easy. I don’t get the Kate hate…..

      • flybaby says:

        +1 makes no sense to me at all

      • FLORC says:

        If I may..
        Hate is far too strong of a word. So, let’s put that aside. It’s nothing to do with hate.
        Much of the convo here goes to their PR. When Kate is unable to work we get stories of how Kate is keen to begin working again. When she’s able to do so though. her schedule gets cleared for months. William has been groomed for his role. He accepts the perks, but dismisses the duties by majority. We know they want to play normal, but keep the benefts. The PR tries to make this sound acceptable.
        It’s the PR that really puts this image out there and then expects good will to flow in.

        If I have strong feels on any of this… Lately it’s the funding needed for BP renovations. All that money over years was converted to private funds or given to WK for KP renovation, re-renovations, and Anmer. Now BP needs that money and will pull very much needed funding for the disabled.

        There’s a lot more at play here than Kate’s spending. Yes, her position needs to do more and she’s not earning her keep while her husband who has yet to embrace his duties that keep him in luxury. They can be private citizens if they want to live this way. Otherwise they can step up.
        If that doesn’t make sense then there’s much that is being ignored or not being properly weighed imo.

      • frisbeejada says:

        Yes, well said Florc. We have social funding crisis and people in the UK who are disabled are having to wait up to 10 months to get a payment from the government under the new welfare cut system – it’s causing untold misery and stress to those least able to deal with it. At the same time we have Kate and William swanning around spending public money like water because money is channeled – via one funding stream or another – from the most needy and vulnerable to allow them to live a life of luxury unimaginable to the majority of us. Parasites is the word that spring to mind,

      • FLORC says:

        This isn’t directly because of WK, but they are greatly benefitting from it and maybe not questioning where all this money appears from?
        I think it’s the Monarchy as a whole. It’s shameful behavior and actions to better the lives of those at the top while stripping away the last from those at the bottom. And those at the bottom? The funding for some in question? Money to give them the ability to work. You know this and others do too.
        Just stating because it’s often lost as a non-issue with the whole “why are people mad at Kate just being a mom” argument. I think if the whole picture was seen it would be tough to ignore and defend.
        People like Sixer. Honestly I don’t know how that woman holds it together sometimes. Ganja laced tea?

      • Sixer says:

        Ha @ FLORC. I do rant a lot. The four of us went on the anti-austerity march last weekend, plus my brother and his family and Mr Sixer Senior. I doubt these things accomplish much, but they certainly make you feel less alone in your railing against it all.

    • Sixer says:

      You might if you were paying for them, Sayrah.

      • Liberty says:

        Pssst, Sixer!!!

        “Sayrah” backwards is “HaryAs” as in uh, Harry’s Ass, as in, I think this is our Kitty posting and yawning luxuriously while Mummy and Maria wipe spit!

        Just wanted to alert you to this, as it may mean….she’s not paying and won’t get your comment! :-)

      • Sixer says:


    • Megan says:

      The resentment towards Carole’s success really bugs me. You never see these kinds of stories about Michael Middleton and yet he has been a more than willing partner from day 1.

      Did Carole steward Kate’s relationship with William? Sure, but let’s face it, if put in the same situation, a lot of us would have done the same thing – even if we don’t want to admit it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I wouldn’t treat my daughter as a second class citizen, teach her her only value is between her legs, and encourage her to belittle herself to land an emotionally immature and selfish man who isn’t in love with her. Good to know you would.

      • Liberty says:

        Notasugarhere, I am applauding your comment.

      • Nancy says:

        I would NEVER encourage my daughter to marry a British royal. It doesn’t tend to work out well for the women.

      • Mary-Alice says:

        How discriminating. It doesn’t matter who he truly is then but his title, eh? Just wow.

  3. Sixer says:

    “William and Kate’s rejection of Charles as a formative influence for George has been painful for him, but it is clearly Carole whom William and Kate believe will instill the right values in the future King.”

    More like, the others are busy and Carole’s at a loose end.

    • kcarp says:

      Right, they are off doing Royal things and Carole is there. I don’t think it is an out right rejection.

      According to most accounts William is off doing his thing a lot of time, that leaves Kate with the kids, I don’t think it is strange she is with her family more than his.

      I am home with my kid all day so most of the care falls to me, she sees my mother more than my husbands.

    • Jaded says:

      Exactly. The others actually work while William faffs around with helicopters and Kate shops.

    • FLORC says:

      I find much of this article to be kind of BS.
      We know Charles and Harry have time with George. It’s just not broadcasted like it appears to be with Carole.
      And I never thought it was Carole’s “working class roots” that were the issue. It was the way they tossed around money they didn’t have to land William or let Kate so poorly treated. That was the issue imo. The stop at nothing to be seen as old money type of new money.

    • suze says:

      What about Michael? He seems to have dropped out of the narrative.

      Is he rattling around alone in the 10 bedroom manor house while Carole has taken up residence at Amner? Isn’t his influence middle class enough?

      • anne_000 says:

        There was a story after the housekeeper and her groundskeeper husband left Amner Hall and went back to working for the Queen, that Michael was busy designing Amner Hall’s landscaping. At the time, I thought maybe Michael getting into AH’s gardening might have been thought of as overreach by the landscaper and part of the reason why the couple quit.

  4. Rosalee says:

    She is the mother of the future Queen and grandmother to the future king of England and a dozen or two commonwealth countries so I think she hit the glass ceiling on social climbing

    • Cee says:

      Not to nitpick but… She is the mother of a (possibly) future Queen Consort and grandmother to a future King of the UK of GB&NI and Commonwealth.

      • Caroline says:

        Well said. Let’s be accurate if nothing else.

      • Rosalee says:

        geez if I knew this was a formal gathering I would have listed the countries in alphabetical order and wore skirt – what does accuracy have to do with gossip ;P

      • notasugarhere says:

        I’d add grandmother to a possible future king. The way they’re headed, most of the Commonwealth exits after HM passes away and the rest of the monarchy ends when Charles goes.

  5. LadyMTL says:

    While I agree that she shouldn’t be ashamed of her roots, I don’t believe for one second that Mama Middleton isn’t over the moon that her daughter is now in line to be queen one day. Mama worked hard to get her girl married, after all…now’s the time to enjoy the fruits of her labors (literally). ;)

    • belle de jour says:

      I can only hear Carole Middleton pronouncing the word ‘arriviste’ in Hyacinth Bucket’s voice.

    • Christin says:

      If she is such a worker bee, it is amazing that she doesn’t view her child(den) and SIL as lazy.

      However, the more I read about her, she sounds like the type who loves to play the role of indispensable, hardest working person for family members who can carry their own load. Those family members often end up incredibly lazy and ungrateful.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        She’s a control freak co-dependent who loves to be seen as the Rock of the family, the matriarch whom everyone can rely on in a crisis. She has manouvered herself into this position so that she can live through her children – and grandchildren – vicariously. She is a crafty, scheming spider of a woman who now gets to shape the values and morals of the future King. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, etc. William seems content with the status quo and won’t lift a finger to change anything, but if Kate has a single independent brain cell she will grow a set of ladyballs and kick her mother out, stat.

      • FLORC says:

        Codependent on what/whom?

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        William. By making herself indispensable to him she is assured of protection and elevated social status. The woman will stop at nothing to achieve what she truly wants. Namely, a title.

        It’s unlikely to happen while the Queen lives and breathes, but Carole is playing the long game. Imo.

      • FLORC says:

        By that logic she’s also dependent on George.
        IDK… I think wealth and making sure there is never a divorce is her prime goal.
        A seperation would backfire in a big way on the Midds. Keeping the peace in the marriage is top priority imo.
        That makes sense with all the extended stays Kate has had at her parents during her marriage. And often having Carole by her side in place of any friends outside Carole and Pippa.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        FLORC: I love how you call me Loch, lol. You may also call me Lomond to be geographically specific. *wink*

        Divorce or separation would spell the end for Carole and her hapless daughter. It’s simply not an option for her, so she’ll dig her hooks in to the very hilt to prevent any such occurrence. She seems to have lulled William into such a drowse. It’s sad really that he’s allowed himself to become such a milquetoast, but there it is.

        If anyone dares to stand up to her, she’ll cause no end of grief.

      • FLORC says:

        LadyOfTheLomond :D
        It was done for simplicity, but love the typed out title!

        I think (IMO) William has become verry protective of her. She’s treated him as he wants. He is the golden child who does as he pleases and is still beloved. Where a true family will want better for you than indulgence. They want you to achieve and thrive and be your best version. William to the Midds simply has to Be.
        Though I also think a day will come where William might have to distance himself from Carole or the Midds. Here and there we’ve seen isolated incidents. Would he risk his reputation for her then?

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        I love it 😂 I always liked the Walter Scott poem, so used the name with loch instead of lake to indicate my Scottishness, although these days I’m more the ladyofpodunkvilletexas now that I’m thousands of miles away from Loch Lomond.

        The more Carole coddles William, the more malleable he becomes, or so it might seem from where she’s standing. Putty in her hands, as it were. He does seem to be very protective of her, yes, even repeatedly snubbing the Queen to celebrate Christmas with the Middletons.
        Someone on another thread yesterday (frisbeejada or betti I think, or maybe Sixer) remarked that William is throwing off an Edward VIII vibe these days, and I’d agree that’s exactly how it seems, with all of his vacillating and reluctance to step up to the very important role which he has been groomed for all his life. Can you imagine if he were to abdicate? Carole would probably have a seizure on the spot.

        This Golden Child treatment may backfire, badly. I don’t think Carole is aware of just how badly should the unthinkable happen.

      • FLORC says:


        As sad as that is I don’t think Carole would have put up with William’s treatment of Kate if he was to live off his own funds without being in line to the throne.
        If he were to abdicate The press would turn on him in a huge way. All the dirt they’ve been forbidden to print. Front page.
        The homes or at least epenses regarding them gone. And I truly believe Carole would see William as dead weight and a black spot on her family.
        The heir doesn’t abdicate and walk away silently. And by extension the Midds would too for being more active than any other married in family outside of Boleyn in that regions history.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        It would be a huge act of folly on William’s part if he were to shrug off his birthright for all the reasons you cited, however I wouldn’t put anything past him because of his track record of petulance. He’s been over-indulged now for many years, both by the the Midds and by his birth family, to the point where he has lost any sense of accountability or conscience. In many respects he has already abdicated, in his own head at least, in terms of personal responsibility. Whether or not he formalises his intention with a future announcement remains to be seen, but I doubt he has the stomach for it. Dim as he is, I doubt he’d go the whole hog. And I doubt that the Queen will allow this to go on for much longer.

        It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. I think perhaps the Queen has ordered a hands-off approach at least for now, in the hope that William outgrows this phase, but as time goes on she will likely exert enormous pressure either through Charles or the Men in Grey for William to be brought to heel. It’s probably also inevitable that George will be forced into early kingship training, around the age of 5 or thereabouts. All speculation on my part of course.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        And yes, I do agree that Carole’s ambition blinded her to the point where she was (and still is) willing to overlook William’s abysmal treatment of Kate. Not the hallmark of a loving mother, in my book. I’d love to know what Michael Middleton makes of it all.

  6. Damn says:

    Carol Middleton’s hold onto her daughter, son in-law and now her grandchildren reminds me of Gemma Teller from Sons of Anarchy. She wants influence in the highest circles of the British high society and the only way is through her daughter and now through her grandson. If he forms a strong attachment to her then she thinks Charles can’t push her to the side.

  7. Sullivan says:

    “Doors to manual” –Help me out.

    • inthekitchen says:

      She used to work as a flight attendant.

      Although I always read it was Kate who was insulted this way – Will’s friends would say this as she passed by, call her limpet, and all the rest. It really shows what kind of person Will is to allow his friends to insult his girlfriend, what kind of person Kate is to stay with William, and what kind of person MaMidds is to encourage and help her daughter keep William/get him back after break-ups/etc.

    • Becks says:

      Yeah, I had to resort to googling that too when the stories first emerged about Carole Middleton. Near as I can figure out, it is a phrase spoken by British flight attendants during the safety demonstration, and was used to needle Kate.

    • anne_000 says:

      From what I read on Yahoo Answers, the full phrase is “Cabin crew, doors to manual and cross check.”

      The explanation said it means they’re opening the door manually because it’s not an emergency situation in which the doors opened automatically with the escape chute being deployed.

    • Robin says:

      I always thought that William’s friends allegedly mocking her by using that phrase was really insulting. Being a flight attendant is a stressful job and in addition to dealing with obnoxious passengers they also have to deal with safety should anything go wrong. It’s an important job and not well-paid, and she deserves respect for having done it.

      • bluhare says:

        I did too. If my friends did that to my boyfriend, or any of my friends for that matter, there’d be hell to pay.

      • FLORC says:

        It was insulting and meant to be so. I’m with Bluhare.
        Had a bf tried that with me it would be off. You don’t stand for anyone insulting your family by taking a perfectly fine job to provide.
        Had William ever been against those mocking names it would have stopped imo.

  8. lila fowler says:

    Anyone who isn’t nobility or billionaires themselves will be accused of social climbing when they marry into the Windsor family.

    • LAK says:

      That isn’t true. Sophie Wessex, Autumn Philips, Mike Tindall are all from middle class families. No great wealth there. Their class has never been an issue.

      The wider windsor family has married people from diverse class/wealth backgrounds.

      Further, many of the aristocratic families consider the Windsors a downgrade despite their status eg Charles’s first marriage was seen as an upgrade for HIM because he was marrying up.

      • Talie says:

        “Sophie Wessex, Autumn Philips, Mike Tindall”

        I don’t know if you can compare them to Kate , who will be Queen — so naturally her family gets scrutinized unfairly.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Her family is the only family that has traded on the royal connection for personal benefit. Taking lease deals on cars, accepting freebies from designers – all because of their royal connection. Pippa book deal. 1 million in taxpayer-funded security renovations to their home, etc.

      • LAK says:

        Talie: whoever married William or Harry will be scrutinised no matter their background. It comes with the territory and it doesn’t make Kate unique in that respect.

        Leaving that aside, my comment was in response to previous comment regarding criteria to marry into the royal family of which there are many members, not just Charles’s family. All the people I listed, including Kate would not have been allowed to marry in, if wealth and aristocratic roots were a deal breaker.

        Actually, Kate is the best demonstration that that rule doesn’t apply since she doesn’t come from immense wealth nor aristocracy and is now a future queen consort

      • Liberty says:

        Signet rings. I will forever think of the ludicrous hungry mass-ordering of Middleton signet rings as a “sign” of things to come.

      • notasugarhere says:

        And choosing skiing as the centrepoint. Not pride in having a self-made business, or their working class past. Not the area of England where they’re from. Their love of skiing. At least it wasn’t palm trees and beaches to represent Mustique.

    • bluhare says:

      I’m not sure that I’d agree with that. You don’t hear it about the Rhys Jones’ and you don’t hear it about Cmdr Lawrence’s family. You also don’t hear about Mike Tindall’s family, and he’s got a profile in his own right.

      The only ones we ever heard about — and then only peripherally — were the Spencers and the Fergusons, both of whom ran in royal circles, and now the Parker Bowles, but they also ran in royal circles.

  9. Talie says:

    In America, the Middletons would be considered upper class, wealthy.

    • Damn says:

      In America the money decides your social class in Britain it’s your ancestors, it’s pretty much a caste system. It doesn’t matter how bad you are in school or at your job if you come from the upper class in Britain especially if of nobel blood you will have a top job and will always be considered better than the peasants.

      • bettyrose says:

        Damn, that’s a good explanation for non Brits, but it still leaves me wondering what they mean by “middle class values.” In the US that’s euphemismistic for getting by, which hardly describes the Middletons.

      • Talie says:

        Same in some parts of Asia as well!

        *Currently reading Crazy Rich Asians/China Rich Girlfriend LOL”

      • belle de jour says:

        In America, we still have ‘old money’ – which is most definitely based upon an inherited caste system – and which has very much to do with your ancestors… though, oftentimes, very little to do with your ‘current’ money.

      • FLORC says:

        I’ve found old money in the states to be more often than not understated. With a few rogue families having absurd levels of funds and their offspring flaunting it like new money.
        Overall agree with your assessment.

      • Sassy says:

        There is a caste system alive and well, but well hidden in the US. Old moneyed families stick together and hire each others sons all the time. The Bush family is one example. Mellon family another.

    • Vanda says:

      In UK you can be poor and upper class and vice versa.

  10. perplexed says:

    Well, I guess George will be a hard worker? Why didn’t she instill the same values in Kate?

    • lila fowler says:

      The only thing Waity has ever done is hang around long enough to get the ring. Some would consider that the ultimate task. Manual labor is for peasants.

    • inthekitchen says:

      Why would we think MaMidds would instill hardworking values into George? If anything, I think she’ll treat him the way she treats William: spoiling him, giving him whatever he wants, etc. I guess all that is fine for grandparents to do, but not if you’re the main caretaker, because then you’ll just raise a spoiled brat!

      And, yeah, Kate has no hard-working, “middle-class” values (if that is what “middle-class values” mean). Kate is so lazy and work-shy. All she has ever done was work to get William and wait around long enough for any other women to go away. I feel like Carole’s goal with Kate was to give her whatever she needed to land William (same uni; money, so she didn’t need to work and could be at W’s beck and call; an apartment in the city; free vacations for William (where supposedly W&K would be set up in the best room with candles and all the rest laid out for them by MaMidds…gross!); plastic surgery; and on and on).

    • Liberty says:

      I guess this means she will teach the babies to tan, ski, marry well, make marshmallow pies and write (poorly) books that don’t sell while accepting masses of survival cash from uncles doing very sketchy or illegal work?

      Carry on, Carole. And watch out for Harry in your side mirror.

      • Nancy says:

        Haha! Watch out for Harry!

        I have a feeling there’s been a breach in Harry and Kate’s relationship. At polo, Harry and Will looked tight, still, but at the parade day, the name of which I can’t recall, Kate and Harry looked to be barely talking. And Harry took his time going to meet Charlotte.
        I wonder if Harry is annoyed at the grasping, climbing Carole and Kaye?

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        Are you referring to the Trooping of the Colour? Kate was horribly, horribly stressed out on the BP balcony, I did notice that, too. Almost everyone seemed to ignore her apart from Prince Philip. William was carrying George, and gestured for Kate to come up to the front beside him, but that would have entailed squeezing in beside the Queen, and she couldn’t bring herself to do it. I’m almost certain the Queen sensed her discomfort and left her to squirm. Naughty Queen. 😉

    • anne_000 says:


      Which of her three children has an actual job that wasn’t based on Uncle Gary’s money or their connection to Royalty?

      Uncle Gary said he’s paid for James’ cake and marshmallow business. James had three businesses and all of them either went kaput or didn’t make enough profit to pay anybody’s salary for a year. Pippa got her money because of her connection, not because she’s a talented writer. Kate got her money by not working so that she’d be on beck and call for whenever William wanted to see her.

      And it’s been said that Carole got some money from Uncle Gary too. I’m sure that Party Pieces got more revenue because of the publicity from Kate being with William.

      Anyhoo, is Carole telling William and Kate to work hard like she’s supposedly raising George to believe in doing? If not, then why not?

  11. Ninks says:

    The details about the trust are old news. I heard about it years ago, I think it was a British TV documentary about Kate around the time of her marriage. It’s not a new claim and the documentary had done their research on her family so I don’t think it’s sketchy either. It’s always puzzled me why people have questioned the source of the Middleton’s income; for all their faults, the parents have worked very hard and created most of their own wealth.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I suggest everyone read the Telegraph article, Royal Wedding: Middletons’ money – how was it made?

      The trust was no where near as big as some think, and the wealth of the Middleton’s is greatly exaggerated.

  12. Becks says:

    Hey, Will and Kate, you two pathetic layabouts! Instilling the “right values” in your own children is YOUR job!!!

    If that is really what they are doing- outsourcing the most basic of parental duties- Just how lazy are these two??

    Sure, hire someone to do the heavy lifting, but Instilling values and teaching them to be a good, productive member of society should always be on the Parents. And frankly, no matter how much help I can afford, that is one job I would never, ever give up to someone else.

    • perplexed says:

      Good point!

    • anne_000 says:

      True. That’s what the DB article sounds like it’s doing. Saying that it’s Carole that’s instilling the value of hard work and fair play into George. Why can’t W&K do that? Is it saying that they can’t because it’s missing from them?

      • notasugarhere says:

        How is he going to learn fair play and hard work from Carole one-on-one? He is the realization of her decades-long social dreams, she’s not going to risk losing his affection through discipline.

        Didn’t PGTips steal a toy from another kid at the New Zealand event? We learned about him hitting another kid with his toy at polo.

        Many children can benefit from the social interaction of daycare. Sounds to me like PGTips needs to spend time in an environment where he isn’t the pampered center of attention. Somewhere he’d be treated like any other kid.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ notasugarhere

        It’s odd how Diana made sure that both William and Henry interacted with other kids from a very early age and that she was a daycare worker, but William doesn’t seem to have learned the value of that.

        Doesn’t he look at his wife and see how socially awkward she is when meeting and interacting with strangers and think that his son should be brought up more like his mother wanted rather than what Carole and Kate thinks should be? Especially since George’s future depends so heavily on being socially acclimated.

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        She didn’t do a very good job of instilling those values in her own children. I fail to see how she will accomplish that with this new generation and how her daughter and son-in-law are capable of doing so either. Good luck, George and Charlotte. You will need it.

    • FLORC says:

      It’s been notiecd in many articles when it comes to the Cambridges marriage and the duties of parenting Carole is highlighted as the one doing it all. And the one that still cares for Kate who can’t.

      On the other side Kate took George aside to be a parent and talk to him about hitting the other kid with the toy car. Yet the press didn’t cover that. And made the shots of Kate trying to catch george from running away into Kate and George dancing/playing. If Kate being a normal parent not appropriate?

  13. ickythump says:

    In my world grannys are a source of support, wisdom, cuddles and encouragement …NOT a substitute for a parent cos they cant be arsed. And Carole looks as rough as a badgers in that top pic.

    • Olenna says:

      Ha, badger! In my quest to deal with a small, but destructive woodchuck, I once watched a video about badgers. They are some really nasty critters and very hard to get rid of once they’ve burrowed in.

      • Sixer says:

        They’re only culled here because they are thought to spread TB and all cattle testing positive for TB have to be destroyed under EU regulations. It’s a big controversy here. And the culls are only experimental to see if they work, not well established or widespread. Most people are thoroughly against it. British badgers are not particularly invasive or troublesome – to residents or farmers.

      • Olenna says:

        Thanks, Sixer. I revised my comment, thinking that I might be overstating the problem from when I heard about them a few years ago. We don’t have a badger problem here (Mid-Atlantic); ours are deer, which are culled in some areas and sterilized in others, and nuisance wildlife like woodchucks and raccoons. Trap and relocate is the preferred method for nuisances. Because of over-development, wildlife moving into the suburbs (coyotes in your backyard!) is becoming more and more an issue, and the pest removal companies are kept busy because some critters carry rabies and flee or tick viruses, and most people don’t want the risk of handling them.

      • Sixer says:

        Nuisance wildlife here would be rabbits and deer (in rural areas) and foxes (rural and urban). Not badgers! And, like I say, the badger cull has to do with disease, not nuisance. I love badgers. Often to be seen wandering along in the lane outside my house at night and they are relatively peaceful creatures. They fight amongst themselves sometimes but they don’t cause property damage or attack livestock.

        We don’t have any decent sized predator wildlife – although there are campaigns to rewild certain areas.

  14. Lara K says:

    Teach George her values???

    George will have a hard time marrying up. What other values exactly does she have to teach??

  15. seesittellsit says:

    Middle class values of hard work?? Her elder daughter spent all of her twenties living off her parents while the family got behind her push to hook the matrimonial prize of her generation and ensure that she never had to work hard again at anything except decorating large homes, waving to crowds, going on luxury vacations, and shopping.

    The other daughter has been drifting through life getting one tiny overpaid short-term job after another that she never would have gotten without her sister’s royal connections.

    Carole Middleton may not care that she’s been quite correctly tagged as an arriviste climber – they usually don’t care, they only care about getting where they intended to go. She’s probably far too shrewd not to know that as long as her descendants are placed where she had to “climb” to, what people call her is immaterial.

    I would venture to guess that the Queen throughout her twenties worked 100 times harder than Kate Middleton has ever or will ever work in her entire life. And if Carole Middleton is sticking close to her grandchildren it isn’t to shape middle-class values: it’s to ensure she remains an influential player in the circles which she so nakedly aspired to penetrate.

  16. Murphy says:

    If she’s so calculating you’d think she’d be doing something to get Kate to work more and become more appreciated and popular. Because all this work with George will be for naught if the People reject William when he becomes King.

    • anne_000 says:

      I’m thinking that it’s because:

      - If Kate goes to work and isn’t at Amner Hall, then how can Carole justify hanging around there?
      - Kate’s been taught not to do anything that requires time commitment (like work), because her time has to be spent being on call for William in order to keep him.
      - Kate doesn’t seem to have ever been taught this hard-work value that DB says Carole is installing in George.
      - Kate is socially awkward and not skilled in doing greet and meets. She seems like she’s not interested in doing well in her public speaking skills. She always sounds like she’s never prepared and read her note cards with her three-sentence speeches.

    • We Are All Made of Stars says:

      Yeah, but people are stupid. They have short memories and forgive quickly if there’s something pretty and heartwarming to look at. He/She has decades before they have to get up and work to convince people to like them. Only the smart people will refuse to be persuaded.

  17. Liberty says:

    HANG ON. I just thought of something.

    The paparazzi that Willy hates existed to feed the hunger of people LIKE CAROLE AND KATE who hungered for every photo and detail, who desired every whiff of movement, travel, interests, isn’t that so?? they used all this pap stuff to stalk him, basically, and then enter the borders and conquer. Thanks, press!

    And now in the ultimate dimwitted move, to illustrate his scorn for the paps and the system, he has handed himself, his mind, his kids and his crown over to the very sort of people who pay the salaries and support the livelihood of the paps he is said to loathe. Who even feed them possibly via Tanna and who use the paps to market their other two layabout kids. This is ……perfect. Royal IQ test marks = fail.

    Well done, lazy man, bravo on your lack of critical thinking.

    • Murphy says:

      Yeah unfortunatley he just doesn’t see the obvious irony in his actions.

    • LAK says:


      I can see how the nanny pap strolls are explained away to him and to the public, but I wonder how the in-law pap strolls, including the ones he is persuaded to participate in, are explained to him.

      • LadyoftheLoch says:

        Yes, definitely this. William isn’t the brightest bulb in the royal box.

      • Liberty says:

        Right??? Oh good, I’m glad you’re all thinking this too. Yes, the nanny strolls, easy to connive a tale there for him, but the rest? Pllllleeease.

        I mean, isn’t there a story that Kate had a William poster on her wall as a student, too? So! But yes. Box of dim bulbs, lavishly sustained. I would LOVE to hear what Anne and Harry and Sophie (Wessex) would say about all this.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Played him for a sucker, right-o!

      • notasugarhere says:

        LIberty, we learn a little. Anne’s rags to riches comment at the wedding. Her comments that the engagement, birth, christening have nothing to do with her. Sophie correcting people and clarifying that Kate Middleton wasn’t learning to ride despite PR stories.

      • Liberty says:

        Notasugarhere, I had not heard any of that. Thank you for sharing.

    • Sixer says:

      Yes, yes, and thrice yes. Liberty, you are so right.

  18. Betti says:

    Middle class values of ‘hard work and fair play’ – oh please those should be the kind of values that any parent instills in their children. And why didn’t she instill them in her own?

    George will grow up to be like Kate – unable to function as an adult without Granny there to help him. Carole has raised her children to be co-dependent on her – with Kate in particular she clearly groomed her to make the best marriage.

    The way Will treated Kate for 10 years was appalling, yet she kept going back for more – encouraged by her mother. Both are obsessed with him – Kate’s obsession with Willy at St Andrews was well documented with people who knew her stating that from the day she arrived her goal was to nab him. Girl has determination.

    I don’t doubt Carole has a thick skin – as the article state you would need to to build up a business.

    • Betti says:

      As for the class thing – i firmly believe this was part of the image Kate and her family wanted to portray. A normal girl marries the prince kind of fairy tale – only it backfired on them as their ambition was too naked for all to see.

      The Mids created the ‘social climbing’ attitude towards them – from cashing in with PP, getting freebies, tipping off paps – the stunts they pulled only showed their game plan. No one else’s background is used against them by the press – the Mids pushed that narrative on us and its bit them on the ass.

  19. MediaMaven says:

    i wonder if William sees Carole’s role as much like his mother tried to do for him (while she was alive) – give him as normal a life as possible. And I’m sure Kate and Carole did an excellent job of “selling” that to Wills. I do have to say, tho – Kate did have a child just a few months ago – maybe Carole is trying to help out by getting the George out of the house so that she can bond with Charlotte? Or so that Charlotte can bond with the Nanny (more like it)………

  20. bluhare says:

    I’m calling BS that Carole doesn’t care if people call her a social climber or arriviste. The very definition of social climber is someone climbing up in society to belong there. Being called either defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?

    She cares. I also think she truly loves her children and and grandchildren. I think she also truly terrified the royals will take them away. Ergo, there constantly. (And I don’t think this negates the first paragraph,)

    • notasugarhere says:

      If you love someone, don’t you want the best for them? Three co-dependent adults who cannot function without mummy is love? I think she has confused her family’s social ambitions with what is best for them as human beings.

      When Pippa and James have kids, we’ll see how hands on Carole is with them. If she continues to focus her lazerbeam attention on the first two grandchildren? Then we’ll know she loves them more for their social position than because they are her grandchildren.

      • bluhare says:

        I don’t want to get into a psychological discussion about what love is. All I am saying is I think she loves her children and grandchildren, and is/was terrified of losing them to the royal machine. Maybe for good reason, even.

        That being said, I also think she’d cut off *insert body part here* for a title.

    • Vava says:

      I agree with you, Bluhare. She is worried about being left out of the picture. Other in-laws seem to disappear from the limelight, and she won’t do that. But Kate seems to have an unhealthy reliance on her mother, IMO. And how her mother could possibly encourage her to continue to date William after the way he treated her? Just that alone revolts me. My mom would have said, “dump that chump!” She would have also said, “you need to get a career and be self-supporting”. Instead, Carole’s approach was being an enabler so her lazy daughter could finally land a prince. The story would have turned out better if the prince was someone to admire. William has very few redeeming qualities from what I’ve seen.

      • marjiscott says:

        That’s what makes me wonder as I read all of these comments. Could the anti-Charles edict be coming from Carole in retaliation for HRH advising William to dump her before the marriage? There could be some major grudges held by Carole about that.

      • FLORC says:

        The Queen wasn’t pleased at their engagement either. I would think if Carole was to hold a grudge against anybody it would be William for his poor treatment of Kate and their families hospitality to him.
        Charles was said to have asked William if he was going to marry her or not. He said no and Charles said to moe on then. Paraphrasing.
        It wasn’t get rid of Kate. It was stop wasting time and possibly leading this girl on if you didn’t intend to marry. That’s hardly grudge worthy imo.

      • Liberty says:

        Vava, I’m with you on this.

        bluhare, I understand your take on Carole’s presence. My take is this: that she is so used to controlling her kids and her husband, she simply swoops in and grabs the babies (and William) as well. The result we have seen thus far is that her adult children are rather childlike for their ages, lazy and/or dependent upon her. That state of affairs can be intoxicating for people whose fetish is control. I am sure she loves the children; but this apparent takeover of children in their position – underlining “in their position” — seems to be quite another issue, in my opinion.

        For this reason: creating controlled, controllable, weakened family members is one thing. Doing this to a future king/head of state is a much more questionable thing. Frankly. it represents some of the most villainous story lines in fiction and history.

      • FLORC says:

        Things are certainly set up in a way that could paint Carole as a very insidious enemy of the monarchy. It wouldn’t be much or a stretch the way history gets altered.

      • Liberty says:

        FLORC, I probably wouldn’t say enemy, but I can imagine someone whose unchecked obsession with control ends up producing far more damage than a lazy daughter.

      • bluhare says:

        Oh, don’t get me wrong. Carole looks like she’s the controlling sort all right, but I also think that she truly does love her family. I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive.

      • FLORC says:

        I was speaking in Disney style villianess terms.

    • MinnFinn says:

      bluhare – I was gonna go with Carole has thick skin and doesn’t care but your post is giving me pause. You make a good point that inherent in having arrive’d is having been accepted by at least some of your new caste and perhaps tolerated by the rest.

      nota – Evidently Carole has scrapped the middle class value of raising your kids to become hard working, independent adults who give back to society. As far as I can tell a lot of aristos and uber-rich around the world expect and approve of their kids living off the parents’ wealth as they dilettante away much of their adult lives.

      • Maia says:

        The DailyMail issued an apology about the article which claimed that Carole was going to move in and run Anmer. They clearly made all of that up. So I doubt that she is “there” constantly.

        This website has a parallel and rather amusing narrative going on which probably has absolutely no factual basis in reality, yet seem to keep the readers endlessly entertained. For instance: Carole lives in Anmer and shares a codependent relationship with William and Kate, William cheated (cheats) on Kate, the Middletons are actually not very wealthy at all, but Gary has something to do with their wealth etc. I have never seen anything that provides incontroversial proof of any of these, and malicious DailyM articles don’t count. Yet they are stated here over and over again by the same people as some absolute truth. I guess that if you say something many times over and over again to yourself, you will start to believe it sooner or later.

      • notasugarhere says:

        These things are discussed in many places and CB is often the most balanced of them. We are not going to start playing the game again that everyone has to give footnotes to prove their opinions.

        There are many sources for information, but you have to be willing to see through the BS, watch what is really happening, and reach your own conclusions. The recent discussion about the second set of photos from polo day was an example. Statements from Berkshire residents who share, first hand, the chaos KM causes in Berkshire. The Telegraph article mentioned above, if you’re willing to remove the blinders that have you convinced the Middleton’s are worth $30 million from PP because some poster on a royal fansite said so once.

        There are smart, well-read posters on here who have decades of experience in watching the Windsor show at work. They are discerning and capable of telling lies from fact, and enjoy discussing the hilarious royal PR machine at work.

      • FLORC says:

        What Nota said.
        Much information we speak of in a generalizing way can be found in archives here since you haven’t seen information backing up what you’ve read here. And other places that are linked in the archives.
        And that game of having to re post a lot of information takes the fun out of this place. Because you haven’t read it and accepted doesn’t mean there’s no factual basis in reality.
        Uncle Gary though. He’s awful.

      • Maia says:

        notasugar: The “smart well-read posters” that you speak about, ironically, are not actually the ones that speak about the issues I highlighted. They stick to what they know is rooted in fact. Or they speculate about things that go on in the Windsors’ head or with their PR. Genuine opinions.
        That is different from stating “opinions” where you have clearly taken liberties and made leaps of faith to paint a picture you think the rest of us should see. Such as the issue with George. You state above that he “stole a toy” from another kid and then that he “hit another child”. First of all, there are no photographs that speak to ANY of this. George was waving his hands – he seems to be one of those limb-wavers where all four limbs are constantly moving. Besides the kid is 2 years old. Second, the tone of that post and the slant that you took – clearly you want to stretch the truth to a point where you can still hide behind “opinion” while disparaging the child. I think that you are simply one step away from next proclaiming that the Cambridges are raising an aggressive bully. And then you will role with that narrative for a year or so before you take another leap to an even more horrendous territory.

        The same thing is done about the Middletons’ wealth. The Middletons paid CASH for their London apartment. Do you know what fraction of households do that? Not even 0.01 percent. Yet, there are references to Gary bankrolling them and drugs and a whole bunch of “opinions” every single time anything related to the Middletons come up.
        Some of the stuff that is written here is actually tantamount to slander.

      • notasugarhere says:

        My word, you give me so much power! You can choose to take whatever anyone posts with pounds of salt. No one is saying you can’t. Every time a poster writes something, are they required to put IMO on it? I feel like we go through this same tiring thing every few months.

        Did you miss the video evidence of Gary, drugs, and underage girls?

        You are free to keep thinking that dealing in cash isn’t highly questionable. You can think an unknown amount of cash magically came from an online mail order business in the pre-dawn of graphical browsers. I’m welcome to look at the evidence from multiple sources and continue to question, as many do, where the money came from and how much there is.

        Reporters are the ones who mentioned the toy incident in NZ. Check through recent threads for the discussions about polo, the video, and the photos from that day.

        And many children benefit from the socialization of daycare. I think PGTips would benefit from it.

  21. waitwhat says:

    I do not understand the bashing of this family…they are exactly what the “American Dream” is about, and Ma and Pa Middleton did what every parent wishes they could do for their kids: set them up financially! Most rich kids are doing drugs, getting arrested, and changing their major 10 times before dropping out of school altogether a la Paris Hilton or Nicole Richie. This woman has set her descendants up for life! I know my mom wishes I’d married a prince instead of being stung along by a jerk all through college. I think Carole and Michael are two very smart examples to follow.

    • anne_000 says:

      I think most good parents want their children to be capable of getting a job, keeping a job, and appreciate the value of hard work and being strong enough to be independent, fully-grown adults. I don’t think the American Dream is that their kids put aside their own growth, independence and personal interests in order to make themselves more appealing to rich men and wait years to catch one finally. Like the Billie Holiday song goes. “God bless the child that got his own”

      Kate was strung along by a jerk all through college and afterwards. The jerk being William. That’s how Kate got her nicknames, Waity Katy and Limpet.

      Yeah, Carole’s descendants through Kate might be rich as long as their lineage may last, but “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? ” I’m not saying they’ve lost their souls, but women like Kate haven’t gained any acclaim based on their own accomplishments and hard work. All she’s getting is derision from people who actually do value hard work and a healthy adult mentality.

      • Becks says:

        Also, “The Mattress” , a nick-name given to her by William’s protection officers. It was well-known that the protection officers who worked with William gave her this nick-name because they would see Kate sneak into William’s quarters after dark with her overnight bag and then leave again in the early morning.

        Waiting around for the Booty-call, doing the early morning Walk of Shame, whatever you call it, it’s not something to be proud of.

      • Becks says:

        Seriously, “The Mattress”nick-name was pretty well-known. Here is the blog picture which did the comparison:

      • Betti says:

        The ‘mattress’ nickname makes me cringe but she put herself in that position time and time again to get big blue. I find it hard to respect someone who cannot respect themselves and that goes for both of them.

        We don’t really know what went on behind the scenes but am sure it was sordid and would make a great Jackie Collins novel.

      • FLORC says:

        I’ve always thought the mark of a good parent is to raise their child to be able to thrive on their own.

        And that mattress code name. Makes limpet look tame.

      • waitwhat says:

        @anne_000 that’s a very politically correct response and all, ya women should have their own (I’m sure Kate’s parents set their children up with trusts), and women aren’t supposed to put up with bad behavior from men. But the reality is that women everywhere wait years for a jerk to propose because he’s still saving money/finding himself/finishing grad school/___________(excuse here). But those jerks aren’t heir to the throne. What’s more, it is pretty impossible to have a normal job and date a prince. Kate couldn’t have worked anything other than a who-are-your-parents-social-connect BS hobby with a title. Like most trust fund kids who start pet hotels and what not…they don’t work any harder than she did at her job which was becoming princess. I stand by my opinion. And people applaud princes Sophie for being real cuz she posed topless but despise Kate for being “waity”…? Whatevs

      • Katydid20 says:

        Seriously? The mattress? How did I never know that story. *cringe*

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is impossible to have a normal job and date a prince/princess? Goodness, somebody better tell Sophie, Maxima, Mathilde, Letizia, Daniel, Chris O’Neill, etc.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ waitwhat

        I don’t get why my response is labelled “politically correct.”

        Women everywhere wait around doing nothing but live on their trust funds while waiting for a man to come get them? Really?

        Her “job” was to wait around and try to get William to marry her? Would she have gotten unemployment benefits if he hadn’t married her?

        There are other modern wives of princes and kings who’ve had professional jobs before getting married.

      • FLORC says:


        The trust was set up for the Midd children for their education. It’s widely thought Uncle Gary’s money played a large role in funding Kate’s lifestyle, while loans and things like renting clothes made up the rest. Or more well known Kate using William’s name and her association to him for a discounted car.

        And imo that’s a load to say Kate couldn’t have a job and date William. What work she did when not employed by her family was tailored to her to leave at a moments notice when barely working at all. And that she still quit rather swiftly. Still, who wants a man who won’t respect them? That’s not love in any sort.

        And anne and others are right. There are a great many married in royals that have had careers and are extremely educated. That Kate is not is a reflection on her life choices and not from dating William.

      • Feeshalori says:

        And it all adds up to the little respect William had for Kate that he expected her to be at his beck and (booty) call, different than the other princes in Europe who obviously embraced the fact that their future brides worked for a living, many being successful in their field, and yet they were still able to carry on with a relationship without the women having to compromise their careers or education at the expense of a relationship. These two definitely enabled each other.

    • MinnFinn says:

      Setting my kids up for a life of idle and rich is not my idea of the American dream or admirable as a lifestyle for anyone and that is why I criticize Carole. I have no problem with someone being rich but my personal belief is that a person should give back to society in proportion to what they have earned or been given with regard to money, talent and skill.

  22. fee says:

    William lives spending time with her family, especially Christmas, he said they lay on the couch, sit on the floor and have fun as opposed at the palace where decorum on how you speak to your grandmother ( the queen), enough with royal protocols, were all human beings, sick of the fancy queen bull. Diana would be proud. And for Kate not doing certain things, remember, the Queen does not want her to be common, sigh, people there are real problems out there

    • notasugarhere says:

      “The Queen does not want her to be common”

      Where on earth did you come up with that? HM’s favorite is Sophie, who comes from a regular middle class background, you know, a commoner? Do you honestly think Her Majesty doesn’t want Kate Middleton sullying her poor little manicured hands with the work of showing up and raising money for charity?

      Yes, there are real problems out there. That’s why all of those people are marching in the anti-austerity marches while W&K spend the better part of $4.6 million a year twiddling their thumbs. Their JOB is charity. The UK desperately needs help. W&K are richly-recompensed to be the ones to help – and they’re too spoiled rotten and lazy to do so.

      • bluhare says:

        There’s a commoner, and then there’s common, nas. Common is not the same as commoner. Common is a pejorative; commoner is not.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Well, yes, bluhare. I’m just trying to understand what she meant. HM doesn’t want her to be common in what way? I took it to mean the poster thinks HM considers working to be common as in undesirable.

      • bluhare says:

        All righty then. As you were.

  23. Emily says:

    I work in corporate events and I recently found out that my boss orders stuff from Party Pieces! And she had no idea that they are owned by the Middletons! So at least somebody is buying from them… :p

    • FLORC says:

      Your boss is wasting money. I looked into their prices and quality. You’re paying average twice as much as Party city or other party supply stores that will deliver.
      I knew someone that ordered from them for the novelty of it. The shipping cost more than the purchase and stuff was so cheap tey were ragey with buyers remourse. Went to Walmart for supplies in a pinch.

  24. MinnFinn says:

    Not to change the subject but I have to ask if anyone knows what happened to the twitter posts with photos of the Jolie-Pitts walking up to KP or BP for their meeting with the Cambridges last week.

    There were twitter links to photos last night but now all of the links are dead.

  25. perplexed says:

    If I were Kate, I’d be a little annoyed that everyone thinks Carole will be raising the Future King and I have no part in shaping him.

  26. Tracy says:

    Oh, for chrissakes. You have no idea how “pampered or spoiled” Kate is. And she seems to be “functioning like an independent adult” just fine to me.

    • Ravensdaughter says:

      I agree! No one really knows how any of the Royals really live-that’s kind of the point.
      Also, isn’t baby George just the cutest?! It must be so fun to be his grandma! You know Camilla wouldn’t be carrying him around on her shoulders; although Diana would have happily carried him around and gotten on the ground or floor or wherever to play little boy games with him :(
      (My boys are now 13 and 15. Oh, did they love their little cars and trucks!)

    • notasugarhere says:

      Posters have often given examples to show WHY they think she is pampered and spoiled.

      Why don’t you share some examples of why you think she is an independent, functioning adult?

    • perplexed says:

      What’s functioning about her except that she diets well?

      Her mom is the one who picks out William’s favourite chocolates, scents, and has candles waiting for him when he arrives home. This stuff is leaked by the Middleton side of the family. I don’t know why they want to leak this info though.

      • Maia says:

        No we do not know that it was leaked by the Middleton family. It could be, but you do not know for a fact that it is. That stuff is printed in DailyMail, which I think pretty much all of the world knows prints hundreds of lies every day. And so presumably, all of that could be lies.
        Another example of someone stretching the truth to pass them as facts. And then running with those “facts” to create an alternative universe where many of you seem to like to spend time in. For some reason.

      • perplexed says:

        Kate’s biographer is known to have ties to the Middleton family.

        William issues threats all the time. If he didn’t want stuff known or he though a particular story was out of line, he’d probably threaten litigation like he does with everything else.

        Anyway, feel free to think Kate is greatly independent. I personally don’t, but I have no investment in whether other people do. I’ll concede to liking Kate more than William though, as he has a duty which he refuses to do and I think she simply follows his lead.

      • Maia says:

        I absolutely don’t think that Kate is independent. I think that she is a lucky and beautiful young woman who was shrewd enough to land the bachelor of her generation and keep him by her side, but fundamentally shallow and of mediocre intellect with no passions or interests that would have captured the imagination of any really intelligent man. William, in that sense is perfect for her. They wallow in their shallowness together. So, see this is my opinion. Not to be confused with a fact.
        I think that what bothers me here is that often DM-spouted fiction is spun as fact.

        Oh, and William only sues for pictures, not untrue articles. Surely you don’t believe that he would sue every time DM prints a lie?

      • perplexed says:

        No, I don’t think he would sue every single time, but if the entirety collective of those stories bothered him that much I wouldn’t put it past him to issue some threats to somebody. He’s not above doing so. He doesn’t take the calm road the other royals do.

        The Daily Mail is ridiculous in the same way The National Enquirer is ridiculous, at least in terms of digging up salacious stories on celebrities and it’s low-brow factor and hilariously weird writing, but I also don’t necessarily think that everything comes from those places always turns out to be wrong either. Usually what we think is stupid at one time has a weird way of turning out to be true, at least where the royals are concerned. Time will most likely tell.

        I don’t get why it would be impossible to think that the Middletons could leak stuff though. Almost everybody at that level seems to have some “source” they stick somewhere. Somehow we can believe that everybody else does it, but not the Middletons? Why would everyone else be considered to be doing it, but not them?

      • bluhare says:

        The royals tend to follow the “never confirm, never deny” mantra. It is rare that they will comment on anything published about them. If they do, they open the gates. Exception that proves the rule: the balcony photos in France.

        As to the Daily Mail, I too think that you have to take what they print with grains of salt. However, there’s another theory to why the Daily Mail apologized. To not apologize and accept a lawsuit would mean opening their source up for interrogation, a source who may deny everything they said for one reason or another, including and up to confidentiality agreements. That source would also then dry up for anything going forward.

        As to what happens or doesn’t happen in Anmer Hall, I don’t particularly care, other than the very entertaining mental images provided, and the fact that it shows the future heads of state can’t take care of themselves very well . . . if true. I personally think there’s grains of truth in it, with the extent exaggerated for public consumption.

    • FLORC says:

      If their PR didn’t outraight state it sometimes I would wonder too. Her dieting, exercise, beauty routine, hairstyle time, shopping habits, vacations, have all been commented on directly. As well as her cooking lessons, flying lessons, pilot lessons, etc… All officially commented on.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Do you never tire of defending them?

        Their critics have valid reasons for criticism. What do you see that is so valuable and defensible in them?

      • FLORC says:

        Is this to me Nota? Wrong spot?

  27. someone says:

    Royal or otherwise, George is her grandson. Carole is only doing what most modern grandparents do: spend time with their grandchildren. My grandparents never played with us when we were kids. They would have thought the idea was absurd. Meanwhile my parents are very hands on with my kids. Every generation defines their own grandparents role. What is important is that the grandparent gives some thought to how they want to bond with their grandchild and not simply do the what the generation before did assuming it was the only right way.

  28. Elly says:

    as if.
    If Carole is so proud of her middle class roots why does she (same for her other two kids) wear a signet ring since her daughter´s “royal” wedding? A normal middle class family my ass…

    I have zero hope in the two Cambridge kids. The boy will become a second William and i have the feeling the girl will end as an anorexic eyeliner addict thanks to mummy´s dieting and the cruel media pointing out every detail about her looks, weight and flaws.
    And not to forget in the times of smartphones and social media they will have zero privacity when they start school. When William and Harry were young a press ban was easy compared to today. I doubt they will grow up being “normal” with middle class values. I predict they will have serious issues.

    But there is a chance the hard-working spanish nanny will teach them work ethic.

    • Liberty says:

      this!! Sorry I posted about the signet ring thing a moment ago above before reading this! So true, right????

      My only hope (past Anne) for seriously “giving back” with actual future good work: Sophie and Harry.

    • candice says:

      I have zero hope in the two Cambridge kids. The boy will become a second William and i have the feeling the girl will end as an anorexic eyeliner addict thanks to mummy´s dieting and the cruel media pointing out every detail about her looks, weight and flaws.
      I don’t know about George taking after William (god help him!) but +100000 to your comment about the potential for Kate’s influence to negatively impact Charlotte. Kate’s disordered eating and body image issues are, needless to say, unhealthy but it’s an even greater shame if this is passed on to her daughter. Hopefully the nannies and other rf members can serve as positive role models?

  29. wow says:

    Yessss, Mrs. Middleton, come on through with it. That is exactly how you have to be when you are in that type of situation. You have to have major thick skin (figure of speech) and not care what other people think of you because there will ALWAYS be someone or some group of people who will have something to say even if they have to make up stuff. You can’t reason with people like that who are determined to dislike you for no good reason. It’s wasted energy. Energy that’s better used by only being concerned about the opinions of her immediate family as oppose to faceless people she doesn’t know.

    I just can no longer dislike this woman. I like Sassy Carole.

    • FLORC says:

      Remember when those pro Carole stories came out? That a PR firm was hired to rebrand them?
      The Carole returning lost dog to family was one. Many reporters and publications refused to carry it as it was from planted PR. This was after the thought of Carole moving into KP caused some backlash (correct my timeline if i’m wrong).
      She cares. Also why they’ve had a relationship with paps for years. You don’t get this far without playing the game. Just own it. She played and played well. Though this article seems pretty wrong all around.

      • maria says:

        FLORC: agree with you. She cares. Because we are told she doesn’t care in a lengthy story….

    • Liberty says:

      Actually, the “faceless people she doesn’t know” are citizens paying for her daughter’s room and board and non-working life, travel, hair, eyeliner and pleasure shopping etc. My guess is the faceless people would be happy to let her immediate family pay for all the expenses of maintaining K&W, though, if they’d like to “go immediate family only” with this whole game!

      But as it stands, these two children aren’t random kids. They are the royal family members. Even if you think royalty has had its day, the fact remains that right now, these kids are not just everyday kids for her to raise as she pleases. She can do that with the offspring of Pippa and James, but the requirements for these two are a little different, I would think.

      • FLORC says:

        Don’t forget those faceless people paid about 1 million pounds in upgrades to her house for Kate and Georges extended stay there. Since costs were security based it was tax funds that got tapped. And all those benefits remain with the house with no place to return funds spent. And by “security” it goes further than bomb proofing and fence lines. It gets into luxury upgrades.

        And I still hope they start exposing George like Estelle is getting. To small events and social media. Only they have to not promise the pics to the press 1st and then release early to twitter… but they’re on the right track.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, those taxpayer upgrades included things like housing (and kitchens!) for the nanny and security staff. Related to how they received RARE planning permissions for their former home to add the same things there, except they moved before the build out began.

  30. aurelia says:

    Snort, snort, Granny Chav Karole doesn’t care about her background. BS, why do you think she has acquired such a fake put on accent??? Obviously not bothered. Pull the other one. I nealry died when I heard her speak. Its as bad as waity’s.

  31. notasugarhere says:

    FLORC, in response to your last question on 26. I was replying to a post from someone else who asked you if you ever got tired of bashing W&K. Their post has been deleted, and I have tried three times to post this message to you under Number 26 but it won’t post.

    • FLORC says:

      That makes sense. Your comment had me confused! Gotta keep these things in good fun!

  32. notasugarhere says:

    Sixer, you must be chewing those tacks with today’s news.