Duchess Kate went to prison today, wore pale grey ensemble: surprised?

Well, well. The Duchess of Cambridge made a “secret visit” to a women’s prison in Surrey today. Surprising, isn’t it? This was not on Kate’s public schedule at all, and while the trip was announced to some journalists in advance, the journalists were blocked from revealing details about the trip “because of security concerns.” Plus, phones and laptops were banned (but not cameras, apparently!). Kate went to prison as part of her work with Action on Addiction, and this trip was to see the work of Rehabilitation of Addicted Prisoners Trust (RAPt). You can read more about the trip here.

So, good on Kate. I’m surprised that she actually A) did something and B) did something substantive, on a tricky, less touchy-feely subject like drug and alcoholic addictions in the prison system. Why is she suddenly so engaged? I’m not sure. Incidentally, did you see The Daily Mail’s Ephraim Hardcastle’s little gossip item about Kate? It was called “The Duchess of Cambridge’s much-appreciated return to work.” I think this could be one of the explanations for why Kate is suddenly so “engaged.”

The Duchess of Cambridge’s much-appreciated return to work – visiting a mental health charity in London and Twickenham for the rugby – cheers her fans. She’ll also attend the premiere next month of the new James Bond movie, Spectre. Other plans are hazy. Flunkeys are reluctant to announce too many in advance. The ‘prickly princess’ is unpredictable. A much-hyped overseas visit next spring currently awaits her nod. Come on, Kate!

[From The Daily Mail]

So much shade in one little gossip piece. They got everything though – “prickly princess” and “hazy” plans. Fascinating.

Fashion notes for this visit: Kate wore a “£365 winter white tweed dress called Eaton by London-based label The Fold.” I like it. I would call it more of a pale ash grey, and what I especially love is that she wore the matching shoes, rather than nude or black LK Bennetts. The bangs though!! Ugh.

Photos courtesy of Getty.

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

262 Responses to “Duchess Kate went to prison today, wore pale grey ensemble: surprised?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. evermore says:

    I really love the outfit. No flyups and it looks lovely. I still HATE the hair.
    Jason earning his keep. He must be aware of how bad the Cambridges image has become.

    Look everyone Kate’s working….#JASON LOL

    • JudyK says:

      Also love the outfit…she looks stunning. But also like her hair much better now…it was so nondescript before.

    • Shambles says:

      This outfit is definitely a win for her, and she needs to buy it in every color. This is how you dress appropriately for a professional engagement. She continues to amaze me in that she can’t find an suitable outfit for a children’s mental hospital, but she turns it all the way up for a trip to prison. Oh, Kate. Just have to laugh.

    • Citresse says:

      Yeah when Kate wears her hair down she looks so unfinished like she rushed out the door half ready.

    • Fallon says:

      She looks fantastic. Great outfit, great shoes, but I still can’t help but wish she would wear her hair in a chignon when she does appearances like this. She would look so professional!


      • evermore says:

        Yes, well put.
        #SecurityBlanketHair .

      • Stacey says:

        She’s young and has great hair. What’s to understand? She may not want to look like someone’s grandmother in a chignon every day. Can’t blame her!

      • Nic919 says:

        For all the money she puts into it her hair isn’t really that great. And she really needs more layers with hair that thick. It just sits there. And many women who aren’t grandmothers wear their hair up on occasion so that they look more professional. She looks like a high school girl playing dress up with her long hair and horrific fringe.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I can’t with anything with a peplum. Any second now, all these peplum outfits will be out of style. Another excuse for her to go shopping.

    • FLORC says:

      The outfit is perfect…. Is it an imposter? Kidding. Good on her showing up and dressing as she should.
      See! she can folow protocol, dress for the occasion, and not look frumpy!

      Now if she can keep up this work pace… I will be impressed.

    • ruby says:

      hahaha! well done, Jason Knauf: Got the work-shy Kate out on an edgier sort of engagement and even provided the press with a written statement “from Kate,” even though she’s still unable to publicly speak on her own. Not sure, however, that all of your efforts to “establish her credentials” will be enough when she herself did not do so during the nearly 10 years after university and four years after marrying into the royal family.

  2. GlimmerBunny says:

    I love her bangs! I’m thinking abosut getting longer, hippie-sih bangs myself, but are thay a lot of work?

    The haircut I’m considering: https://www.google.se/search?q=sienna+miller+bangs&espv=2&biw=1682&bih=826&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMI3LTFhZeSyAIVAqlyCh3f7wgd#imgrc=Y7oTYr-0OWb3CM%3A (my current hair is similar to Sienna’s here; blonde, not very thick and straight) Should I go for it?

    • anniefannie says:

      Very Brigette Bardot! Go for it! But I’m pro bangs ( effective at hiding the 11′s on my forehead)

    • Shambles says:

      Dooooo it! I wish I had the hair texture and face shape to pull that off. It is very Bardot, and I say go for it.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I like it, and have shorter hair with (sometimes) long bangs. The only hard thing is that they are the right length for about 4 days, then they’re too long and sort of disappear into my hair. I don’t have the patience to have them trimmed weekly, and tried it myself once with predictable hideous results. But go for it!

      • mayamae says:

        GNAT, have you tried any youtube tutorials? I’ve been cutting my hair for a year now. I have long hair with long layers, and side swept bangs, and I seem to get a lot of compliments.

    • Wellsie says:

      Also a pro-bangs person and I lurveeee this.

    • Betsy says:

      Her bangs are solidly in Carol Brady territory. Maybe she’s trying to transition into a different, shorter look and this is her getting comfortable with shorter hair.

    • Christin says:

      I like it! After reading the anti-fringe sentiment here, I let mine grow out. I’ve been gradually snipping them to create a side sweep across my high, lined forehead.

      I think bangs/fringe can be very flattering. Kate’s could use a bit of blending, but I don’t think they are a disaster.

    • Lori says:

      I am pro bangs as well. I have a very long face with a LOT of forehead. THe only down fall is the regular trimming. I’m lucky that my hairdresser will let me drop in once a week or so and doesn’t charge me very much or require an appt. I just wait for her to fit me in between appts as its very fast to do.

    • magz says:

      I tried those bangs, fun for a day but you do have to blow them out with a big round brush so that they don’t lay flat on the forehead. For me it was not the best decision because I have cowlicks at the hairline in front. good times.

      • Egla says:

        I have had those all my life. Same thing as you, had to blow them out everyday and use hairspray as my hair are FLAT FLAT. Also i had to trim them every f…. week. I was so used to them that i was afraid to grow them out. Now many years later i am the happiest from growing them. I feel “free”. And i don’t care, i have a big forehead with an 11 there and i still don’t want them back. No no no

    • notasugarhere says:

      As someone else pointed out, she’s SWFing Angelina Jolie in The Tourist with this hairstyle, bangs, and outfit.

  3. De says:

    The title threw me for a second lol

    I like her outfit!

    • wolfie says:

      Kannot Dolittle showed up and was modest. Good for her.

      • aurelia says:

        What no thigh split to give the men inside some jollies????

        Hmmm, she didn’t wear the trolly dolly black pumps of doom. At least her shoes are neutral. In these pics she keeps reminding me of Liz Hurley in that royals show. Google images. The eye liner is the same too. Tacky, trying to be a bit posh. Kate looks older than Liz though even though liz is like 20 years her senior.

  4. Red Snapper says:

    Security concerns… in a prison??? More likely her staff worried she’d cancel at the last second.

    • notasugarhere says:


    • The Original Mia says:

      Exactly! But score one of #poorJason. He got her up and working at something gritty and not glamorous.

    • bluhare says:

      No, I’m going to buy that security was a concern at this one. Perhaps there had been a threat and perhaps due to the nature of the place they didn’t want people to know. Don’t know, but I also don’t discount that there’s a lot of security stuff we’ll never know because for us to know would defeat the purpose of protecting them.

      • Nic919 says:

        Well if they expected Russell Brand and she showed up instead then I can see the need for more security. As if women in a prison give a crap about Kate.

    • Vava says:

      There was a choice comment on the Daily Fail. “Haven’t these women suffered enough?” LOL. If I was in prison. about the last person I’d want to see would be her.

      • Pipa says:

        Why so formally dressed for a prison visit (what is the benefit for someone so out of touch, in expensive dress/heels/ jewelry? simple slacks/pant suit); instead, more time with charities/service-member families, etc … would be more appropriate. She also seem uncomfortable, eager to depart (even with RPOs)

        Recent royals visiting prisons (POW, Princess Anne… who maybe of authority for such visit).

      • FLORC says:

        It’s not formal it’s respectful and professional. While I personally favor pants suits this outfit has nearly nothing wrong with it that falls into constructive criticism. A personal bias only imo.
        It prevents flyaways. Meets her knees. Is simple in design to not call attention. And looks like she can keep warmer than the shirt dress.
        And Princess Anne is pantsuit queen. It’s all she wears and rumored to do so at home.

        Honestly i’m looking, but i’m not finding issue with this past personal preferences.

      • Imo says:

        Everything you said. I love CK and JG Hook pants suits, myself.

      • hmmm says:


        The outfit is not respectful in the sense that there was no consciousness of being respectful. She wouldn’t know the meaning of respect. At best it was a successful shot in the dark. She’s covered up so, kudos to her?

      • FLORC says:

        Yes. The bar has been dropped to the point if Kate doesn’t expose her biscuit it’s a win.
        And IT IS respectful. You may not agree, but that is a personal bias. This outfit really has nothing to give constructive criticism over. Criticism yes. Constructive? Not really.
        She meets protocol and this is professional attire. Dressy professional, but still professional.

        And she might know the meaning of respect and just rarely exercise it. You’ve made an unknowable claim.

        So regardless of aa personal bias and looking at this objectively…
        Pant suit ofcourse would have been better. She could have done far worse. She met protocol and showed up on time. Those are the only points when it comes to this event that should be criticised based on the information provided here. On time and appearance up to code. If she said something foolish have at it. If she stayed 2 minutes. Attack that. Everything else is just looking to criticise. That’s my opinion.

      • cristine says:

        @FLORC you love to pick apart everyone’s comments. I am serious. I find it exhausting. It does come across like you are lecturing everyone.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I find FLORC’s explanations helpful. IMO because English is not her first language, she’s just trying to make her points understood. If you don’t have a native speaker’s shortcuts, sometimes that means a lengthy answer.

      • cristine says:

        I’m not a native English speaker either. I’m surrounded by non native English speakers and native English speakers. If you find her comments helpful, I find them exhausting. She picks on everyone’s words choices. All the time.

      • hmmm says:


        I made my meaning clear. No, I don’t know her inner thoughts, but I do know how she behaves, and there is nothing in her pattern of behaviour to suggest she knows anything about respect, especially self-respect.

        Also, I may have a personal bias, but pointing it out is helpful, how? Like everyone else doesn’t? How does pointing that out add to the conversation unless it’s to invalidate? And who decided what criticism is constructive and that is should be?

        I gave an opinion. No fair to criticise my personal stance and I did back it up with reason. I commented upon using a pattern of behaviour as my guide. That’s all that an opinion needs.

      • hmmm says:


        I tend to agree with you 98% of the time. Not this time. I understand completely what FLORC means and her stance.

      • cristine says:

        @hmm, vava and pipa you ladies got it right. 100% agree w you an all you said.

        @hmm good for you for standing up for yourself. Everyones opinion is biased, yet everyone is allowed to express theirs, in a polite and respectful manner (which is what you always do). I enjoy your comments, keep them coming :)

    • Betti says:

      Don’t buy security reason either – its a prison and they are by default secure places. Me thinks it was last min and this is the reason used to cover that up.

      I think the threat was that she’d pull out at the last minute. Was she actually on time for this one?

      • FLORC says:

        They’ve pulled the security risk card before and it was to visit children so… it’s a bs easily refusal to answer details excuse to hide behind.

      • Vava says:

        I don’t buy the security excuse either. They couldn’t be sure the Prickly Princess would show up, that’s why it wasn’t announced!

  5. Guesto says:

    How funny. I mentioned on a recent thread that’s she’s done next to bugger all for AoA – considering she’s patron and considering it was supposed to be one of her major causes – and here she is doing something for AoA!

    I bet she spends her non-sketching time reading about herself on celebitchy. :D

    • Amber says:

      I hope they’ve been warned. Or more realistically, Jason just showed them the comments on this website :D And then he cautiously suggested maybe doing something for their alleged causes and charities that they’ve done diddly squat for so far. And then showed them the list. The DoLittles do seem to understand earning/distracting from vacations strictly from a PR standpoint, that is. So yeah, at best, this is just the latest, (since it’s the same sequences and pattern of behavior), ramp up to glamour events (this October, that they made sure to announce forever ago) and then a lengthy vacation, (they’re probably hoping for most of November if they can get some good press *cross your fingers*). And do any of the royals “work” much in December? Isn’t that kind of mini-break, church visits, wave to the peasants, time? Which I’m sure William and Kate won’t be around much for–Except for the things that they really can’t get out of–Since they’ll be busy prepping for their grueling trip to the Caribbean. And shouldn’t the ceaseless press coverage and hype for that start gearing up in 3, 2…

      It’s just like with William–String together a few years of this behavior and then we’ll talk. Until then, you’ll get no oohing or cooing from me, or even a pat on the back, for doing the bare-minimum (it’s STILL the least they could do) at what is your job. It’s still one down, 873 appearances to make up for and that too would be doing significantly less than other royals.

      • saywhatwhen says:

        Amber: Dead @ ” their alleged causes…”

        Duchess Lazy gets nothing from me either until she really steps up her game. “Hazy” plans…unconfirmed schedule…??? Please.

      • Pipa says:

        Spot on.

        The normal yearly pattern for these two Donothing Willnot & Cannot, Insincere dash to end of year count/upcoming extended holidays/ luxury vacations.

        PR fake – and HM/BP orders to get out (until another ‘hg’ pregnancy-or delicate snowflake excuse/s …)!

    • Jib says:

      Well, she sure didn’t read the Fug Girl comments – they can’t praise her enough. Someone was even complaining that someone sat between William and Harry at the rugby game, so Harry couldn’t make Kate laugh anymore. I think anyone with ANY powers of observation can wonder if Harry wants anything to do with her anymore. There seems to be a real chill between them, and I think it reads: Middletons.

      • wolfie says:

        I agree with you that there is a chill in the air. Kate wants all of William, of course.

      • Nic919 says:

        I think Americans are easier on her because their taxes don’t support them. It’s like criticizing the Kardashians. Now if US taxpayers had to support Kim and Ko they would be going even more berserk and understand the criticisms of Lazy Katie.

      • notasugarhere says:

        His own comments made it clear he barely knows her. Maybe he tired of the Middleton PR stories about how she was cooking for all three of them, they were great friends, he was going to her for advice on his love life, and so on. Or he tired of them using him for PR. He needs to separate himself from these two, or he’ll go down with them.

      • Tina says:

        Everyone on the Fug Girls is being very careful. People like MsAlva used to constantly defend W&K from the slightest criticism. Now, everyone is aware of the situation. It’s all about the outfits. No one will volunteer anything either pro-or anti-W&K unless someone else does, because no one wants to upset Heather & Jessica.

  6. Jaded says:

    When I read the headline I thought she was doing time for the fashion crimes of wearing jeggings and wedges of doom.

  7. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    Sort of boring, but appropriate for the occasion. I think it would be sort of rude to wear really fancy clothes and jewelry to a prison. Hope she keeps working.

    • MinnFinn says:

      +1 But I actually believe she should have taken her look down a notch.This would have been the time to wear a simple sheath dress from Topshop.

    • Maia says:

      I love the dress and I have been eyeing several pieces on The Fold. They had a pretty decent sale a couple of weeks ago and I ended up getting one of their magnificent pants. Classic piece and it will last me till it goes out of style. The only thing is that each of their items is so costly I can only afford them occasionally. I would love to build a wardrobe of their pieces but it will take a few years.
      Kate looks rough. I don’t know what it is – the loss of fat in the face and with the silly little haircut makes her look quite tired and not like her usual self. I have to say that the entire getup is a bit twee for my taste especially for a prison visit. The silly teenage hair, the ultra-feminine looking cluth and the overmade up face… just does not exude the “power” that the dress is supposed to draw out. Plus her posture. Golly. Can someone tell her that she looks like a frightened chicken with her hands clasped like that in front of her. For god’s sake woman – you have an education, a family that supported you etc etc. Show some confidence.
      The Fold wants to cater to power women with power careers. Not sure that it is the right choice for the Ducchess. Pretty little woman that she is. (Sniff)

      • saywhatwhen says:

        @Maia: What about Hobbs. A little more affordable and some nice, classics there too.

      • Maia says:

        saywhatwhen: I do like Hobbs but I have to say that the construction and material of the pants I received from The Fold is immaculate and much higher than what I have from Hobbs. I will eventually collect more items from them but probably will have to pace myself otherwise I can see huge dents in my bank account !

    • FLORC says:

      No issue with this. Not when it comes to Kate. Although, it does appear she’s flashing the ring again……!

  8. Jenns says:

    I think she looks great here. I even like the hair.

    • Franca says:

      She looks much softer with bangs, she also looks older and harsher with her hair up. I like it much more when she wears it down

    • wolfie says:

      I believe that I’m starting to understand British humor. The Telegraph’ s homepage for the duchess, carries a photo with her hair flying *every* which way, inviting you to read an article about her hair. On the same homepage is a photo of the shirtdress, open to high inner thigh. One has to click on those silly photos to read the articles. They are obvious passive-aggressive digs, and I’m guessing the prickly princess deserves it by their standards. Obviously, we are not the only ones who notice.


      • hmmm says:

        I just checked out the pix, wolfie. Major BURN. I don’t really follow media drama (until I started reading here), but this was rich!

  9. Zapp Brannigan says:

    So her and Bill are off on holidays soon, right?

  10. Lilacflowers says:

    Very nice outfit but surprised those shoes were allowed in the prison – you have to be able to run.

    Mobile phones and laptops are banned from all US prisons. It wouldn’t surprise me if the same rule applies in the UK.

    • Tammy says:

      Very true. Cannot bring a cell phone or lap top in to a prison.. nor can you wear any of the gang colors, jewelry is a no no, no halter tops, no flip flops.. it’s all banned.

      • mayamae says:

        Women in ancillary positions (such as librarian) in a men’s prison, cannot wear makeup, have very rigid dress code, and have to submit to a search (including body cavity) every visit. I just read a fascinating book on the topic.

    • FLORC says:

      Outside the prison too? I think the ban was in part to avoid the press leaking the details before the visit was done.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        It depends on the security level of the prison. Those with a lower security designation, which tends to apply to most women’s prisons, inmates often have access to the grounds around the building for purposes of cleaning the grounds, gardening (both for appearance and growing food crops) or whatever tasks are assigned to them outdoors. In such cases, vistors/staff can’t bring phones/laptops, etc beyond the parking lot.

        So, there might have been some combination of security and press control.

      • hmmm says:

        Thanks for that, lilacflowers.

        Absolutely, I think there was press control. Notice that there are no pix of grimaces and OTT expressions. Must be a favoured few in the media. How special.

  11. Jayna says:

    I love her long bangs. It really softens her. She looks more youthful in a good way with them.

  12. Boston Green Eyes says:

    I like how this pic is a modified version of her “devil horns” bangs/fringe pic that usually accompanies Kate stories.

  13. Karen says:

    Appropriate outfit. Well its a women’s prison… no cute men to flash (sorry, cynical this morning). Bangs are still terrible. But she’s actually wearing an appropriate outfit. So not a total loss, because that’s huge for her!

    Also, she met with the warden (most likely) and the charity…. is it really considered progressive to go to a prison, but (probably) not meet any actual prisoners? Am I still being cynical… I need some coffee for sure.

    Jason you’re getting better at PR.

    • anne_000 says:

      I think Jason found the button to press with Kate. Like the others down thread are saying, she’s trying to copy the AJ look. Maybe Jason finally found out that if you keep pushing comparisons with AJ, then Kate will be motivated to do a little more work.

      Jason might have finally found his groove. Good for you, Jason. At least you keep trying til you find something.

  14. Citresse says:

    Grey for the grey bar hotel.

    • Deedee says:

      I’m surprised she didn’t wear orange, as she has a penchant for theme dressing. Maybe #poorJason talked her out of it. LOL

  15. Kate says:

    I think this is a surprisingly sophisticated look for Kate. Straight, fitted skirt that doesn’t blow up with the breeze … nice change of pace. As for the bangs, they’re not great, but I think they don’t bother me because I’m growing out an ill-advised fringe of my own, and right now they’re in that awkward mid-length and kind of look like hers. I feel a sense of solidarity with the ill-advised fringe gang. Glad to see her doing something useful. I’m dubious because this looks like the mad flurry of activity before her last holiday, but I’ll reserve judgment.

  16. Olenna says:

    She looks nice, except for the bangs/fringe. I read the Hardcastle piece last night and thought the same thing–he packed a whole lot of snark into a few paragraphs. Gave me a good laugh.

    • wolfie says:

      I am amazed with the newsletter that you posted a few days ago, Olenna. It was printed in May 2011 and predicted baby George’s birth in July, 2013. If one believes in ghosts, this provides keen insight to the Cambridge’s. I’ve never seen astrological predictions that are so scarily spot on. I appreciate that you posted it, for the insight, and the shivers: (http://www.astroamerica.com/newsletters/2011-may10.pdf)

      • hmmm says:

        I read it, wolfie and some parts are rather uncanny. But I do not believe in Diana’s ghost controlling things because it doesn’t say much about our free will here on earth. I think that William is basically an aginning $ass, incredibly selfish and self- absorbed and greedy. He’s a man of bad character. That explains everything to me.

      • Olenna says:

        You’re welcome, wolfie. I’m still not sure about the existence of ghosts but the article did make me think twice about the idea of spiritual afterlife, is there a final destination and does ones energy/soul have any influence on the physical plane before it gets there. But, enough of that deep stuff. I think hmmm has a valid point about free will. I believe William’s life as it is today is what he is making it and what may appear as a show of poor character to us, is all his choosing.

      • wolfie says:

        I wouldn’t want to believe in ghosts in this way either. The author’s opinion that the diseased ring of doom should have been thrown into the Thames might have a bit of merit. William and Kate are somewhat obsessed by their mothers – there are four in the marriage – and seems to explain many of their difficulties in maturing. They seem lost in their mother’s dreams. On the other hand, I agree with you, hmmm. Petulant and demanding Willy thinks and behaves like an arrogant $ass, and there’s no excuse to cover that lack.

        Honestly, however, it wasn’t too difficult to imagine a scary, angry Diana. I can imagine that she didn’t want to die. If she had had the good fortune to live, I believe that her natural graciousness would have led her to peace with the situation around Charles. We have to believe that people (hopefully) mature and grow in wisdom. This is what her boys need to understand about her most of all, so they won’t be bitter.

  17. Seraphina says:

    I’d love to see her in something different. Maybe ever, hold on, pants!!!! The female working royals in Europe seem to do a great job. Look at the Queen of Spain. And DoC certainly has the body to carry off well tailored pants or pantsuit. Is she really this boring?????

    • Kate says:

      Honestly, I think it’s a matter of convention. British female royals just don’t wear trousers to official engagements (with the exception of athletic/sporty or extremely informal engagements, like when Kate met the field hockey team or when she played volleyball in her skinny jeans, etc). Princess Anne might be an exception, but she’s eccentric. With the exception of the glamorous Diana, the British royals have always been comparatively dowdy. I would like to see Kate in a sleek pair of trousers as well, but most of the time I’ll settle for a sophisticated modern dress that’s not mumsey and not in a little girl’s silhouette. But I really think the British monarchy is old-fashioned and stuffy compared to the more modern continental royals. The British royals wear fascinators and sheer hose … they’re not on the cutting edge of modernity.

      • COSquared says:

        Countess Sophie & Duchess Birgite(spelling?) do frequently wear trousers on engagements. Mostly CS.

      • Lori says:

        Well look who she’s married too, Normal Bill dresses like he’s 60. At that last thing he tagged along on his brother’s engagement…..Harry’s in a t-shirt and hoodie and there’s Normal Bill straight out of the grandpa section of the Sears catalog.

    • Pondering thoughts says:

      @ Seraphina

      I agree that Kate could do well in a sophisticated pant suit. But Kate isn’t sophisticated. She tries to play cute little british girl in dresses and lately she tries to do an elegant Angelina Jolie. What she doesn’t get about the latter is that Jolie uses her clothes to convey a message and usually there is a speech, too. But Kate has no message and no spoken words for anybody.

      • Deedee says:

        The Queen’s worn pants on engagements, back when she was young and more recently. There is no “convention” that the British royal women don’t wear pants to engagements and a quick search of the internet will confirm it. Also, if you look at any of the retrospectives of HM’s fashion over the last 60 years, you will find she’s anything but dowdy. Elizabeth, Sophie, Anne, Diana, all wore pants on official engagements and tours.

      • zinjojo says:

        I agree on all counts. Kate isn’t sophisticated or worldly, despite her position, and she comes across as very lightweight, and I’m not talking about her physical self.

        Tailored pants with a jacket would have been perfect for a visit to a prison. But it feels like DK is more into playing pretty, pretty princess than truly being serious about her work. It does seem that she appears to be trying to emulate AJ. But AJ is knowledgeable, well-prepped and focused on the work. Unlike DK.

    • lylaoooo says:

      i think she is very very boring too. she looks the same all time, and I agree with you, she should look up to Leticia or Rania.

  18. Natalie says:

    This is a worthy cause to highlight and I’m glad she did it. Here’s hoping she’ll actually show some consistency and keep with it instead of waiting months to do another visit for these issues -at the very least, one visit on this issue per month. Making an occasional visit is not enough to establish a sense of commitment and sincerity and right now, she looks so out of her element.

    • Pondering thoughts says:

      Yep, she looks so out of her element.
      No speech and no public statement and not even one sentence praising this on camera. Either would have made a positive impact in favour of the charity. But no, Kate doesn’t make positive impacts for others.

      • anne_000 says:

        I agree. She basically did nothing to help out this charity. She was there for the work credit. Like she was forced to do community service or something.

        Like you said, she could have made a speech, put out a public statement, talk up the charity, etc. That would have helped them. But this visit seems so one-sided of her. She got what she wanted out of this visit with little giving back.

      • Natalie says:

        It’s so strange to me that Kate as a child had no problem getting up on stage and acting (and I think also at St Andrews) but cannot make a speech without showing considerable nervousness. The Duchess of Cambridge is a role she plays so why is it so difficult for her to act out a speech?

      • Natalie says:

        Right, like do they need money or job placement aid or mentoring? What is the next step beyond the charity educating Kate about its work?

      • frisbee says:

        @ anne_OOO – totally with you on this one, this is all about helping her public image, nothing else.

      • Feeshalori says:

        There’s always an ulterior motive with these two; altruism is not a word in their vocabulary.

      • FLORC says:

        Her charity events if not vacations/parties/celebrity based are photo ops.
        Rarely does she ever speak out in person without script because it usually goes wrong.

      • mayamae says:

        @Natalie, I was the star of my first grade play, and loved nothing more than being on stage for my ballet/tap recitals. But that all ended in middle school. I grew into a very self-conscious and introverted person. It happens.

      • FLORC says:

        Regarding Kate and this… she is no “shrinking violet”. She’s still quite active and not shy from cameras. It only comes up regarding unfun work.

        Toss in professional helpers of all kinds available and willing to work with her and it’s only a lack of actions at this point to not speak.
        Nothing to do with growing up becoming introverted.

      • mayamae says:

        @FLORC – OK, I wasn’t necessarily arguing on Kate’s behalf. I just wanted to point out that it does happen.

      • FLORC says:

        Got it! And agree.

    • Natalie says:

      True, good point, Mayamae, but in Kate’s case I was thinking of her still doing some theater work when she was in college and a bit more recently when she and William were dancing for the cameras in Tuvalu. Granted, she didn’t speak but it was still a mini performance and she looked great.

  19. Betti says:

    Well well – guess these 2 can ‘surprise’ us. Am not holding my breath the new and sudden appearance of a work/duty ethic will last – they do have that 3 wk Mustique holiday coming up and not much else after.

    All i will say is that they had to do something to counter the ‘obvious’ and loud calling out in the press and as usual with them its all about image control. These unannounced visits are damage control nothing more. They will go back to their normal soon enough.

    Those bangs still give me Pickachu vibes.

    • hmmm says:

      The pressure is on them is obvious so this is their usual knee jerk response. Agreed, it’s all about image control. Their pattern of behaviour shows nothing really changes. I wonder how long that holiday in Mustique is really. They sure seem to be building up to something execrable.

    • Imo says:

      I wouldn’t call much they do kneejerk. Most of these events are scheduled up to a year or more in advance. The cambridges do as they please and do not really follow popular opinion. Their PR team does, up to a point but any commentable shift in their image is usually the result of reactions to things that happened many months prior.

      • Betti says:

        “Most of these events are scheduled up to a year or more in advance.”

        For the rest of the Royal Family this is true, primarily as they work full time in their duties supporting the Monarch. However this is NOT true of the Dolittles, they have previous for scrambling visits at the last min, hell Kate has previous for cancelling a charity visit at the last minute feigning HG and was spotted flying out on holiday with wills from Scotland (an engagement that were planning months in advanced). The DIYSOS visit earlier this wk is an example; this was announced as part of Harry’s schedule – Normal Bill was not mentioned until the day of the engagement when he tagged along. Same with the Rugby World Cup opening ceremony, only Harry was confirmed to attend and then those 2 turn up to piggy back.

      • Green Girl says:

        I am sure there are quite a few logistics and planning that go into even a simple visit at a small charity when it comes to the Royal Family. But I also doubt the charity would put up much of a fuss if they got a call that a member of the Royal Family would like to stop in the next day, you know?

      • Imo says:

        Can’t speak to Will and Kate’s planning – only to how things are done overall for royal visits.

      • Deedee says:

        There’s more planning and advance notice for visits by the other royals, because they already have very busy schedules.

      • Imo says:

        Royals plan so far in advance in order to arrange logistics, cement security protocols, run necessary background and compliance screens, give the organizations a chance to properly plan the day for maximum PR/donations and scores of other reasons. The work ethic of any given royal is determined by his/her own personal wishes, priorities, objectives, interests, character and ethics. But the process of arranging the public calendar has been in place much longer than the Cambridges have been around. I find the level of meticulous planning to be very interesting.

      • FLORC says:

        It’s been said passively and intentionally the Cambridges could put events in their schedule, but never officially unless it’s not getting changed like a vacation or premiere. Charities and those involved have noted sudden cancelations. And things like the party at KP where the charity thought for certain enough to say Kate was to attend. Then she dropped out and the charity had to eat their words.

        It certainly appears that everyone plans in advance full schedules except William and Kate. What few items they do put in have come to numerous cancelations last moment.

      • Imo says:

        Your point deals more with the Cambridges’ failure to follow through and not with how the process is designed. Royal events are planned well in advance. It is unlikely that William and Kate are monitoring public opinion and inserting knee jerk events last minute to counter media snark. The majority of their events are planned months ahead of the media cycles.

        Their cancellations tend to be the result of knee jerk personal decisions with little regard for the organizations’ year-long efforts to prepare for the event. This is because events are proposed, planned and scheduled well in advance.

      • FLORC says:

        I do agree with how events are scheduled, but still disagree that is how the Cambridges use it.
        Say they list in their diary. They then remove when not needed and keep what is. It’s there with the intent of as needed.

        And they absolutely have added events very suddenly. Once claiming it was on the books for weeks and found to be false.

        It’s just not the same operation the BRF runs when compared to the Cambridges IMO.

      • hmmm says:


        The problem with asserting that any commentable shift in their image is usually the result of reactions to things that happened many months prior is that things weren’t so bad because she was preggers.

        But I do see how #poorjason has concocted a long term plan- and has put it into action, anticipating negativity pre extended holiday play. After all, she has a new dress for this gig. That must have taken some planning.

  20. hmmm says:

    Did she meet prisoners? If she didn’t meet prisoners, it’s just another pap stroll.

    I love how PR made it all sound so secretive and solemn, as if it were a big deal. So very special.

    • notasugarhere says:

      That was another subtle snark from the press I’d think. Our work is so secretive and special we don’t tell the press? William started pulling that last year. The point is to bring attention to the cause, not sneak around and try to keep the press from covering it. The “Prickly Princess” bit is interesting and unsurprising given her past behavior.

      • frisbee says:

        Yeah ‘Prickly Princess’ is new, I’ve not heard that anywhere before. It’s their way of transmitting that she’s totally unreliable.

      • bluhare says:

        They used it in the articles about Carole running Amner Hall when she was pregnant, and soothing her because she was cranky. I remember that.

      • frisbee says:

        bluhare *waves* yes I remember that now as well, particularly the “to soothe her” bit. I wonder why Katie Bucket has never learned to do this for herself? I would have thought most adults would have learned to handle and deal with their own emotions by the 33.

      • Betti says:

        ^^ Over the past few years there has been a few comments in the press that follow that vein. I think the snark is hinting at how emotionally and intellectually immature she is – which if you look closely enough you can see it there during the GF years.

        I used to think that this marriage wouldn’t last – am beginning to change my mind, thou a part still thinks that if he walks away from the throne she’ll walk away from him.

    • Vava says:

      Yes, exactly. What did she do other than show up in a new dress, clutch her crotch, flash the ring, and slouch? What went on other than a pap stroll. That’s what I want to know.

    • Vava says:

      And to add – the press was there, is Kate incapable of actually SPEAKING? Apparently so because KP did a press release for her, they don’t want her opening her mouth in front of the cameras.

      • Betti says:

        I think they don’t want her to make any off the cuff comments about Willy not being around home – like she’s done before. Seems #poorjason is wising up to the Middleton PR stunts.

    • Pipa says:

      Green, imo (upthread)

      Advance planning is for dedicated, hardworking royals (HM/DOE, POW/ Prince Harry, PA , Wessexs. Prince Andrew and other royals with duties to HM and The Monarchy), those Calendars with 100s of… back to back duties to attend.

      Lazy Willnot&Cannot /Jason staff, dont have such problem.

  21. kri says:

    The outfit is good. but the bangs. Oh, man. There is a rabbit that lives under a tree in my yard with her crazy babies, and I call her Fat Bunny,and she has got ears that look like Kate’s bangs. The Duchess jacked Fat Bunny’s hairstyle. Shameful.

  22. Jen says:

    Does anyone else think she’s really overdoing the extensions lately?

    • MinnFinn says:

      YES! I don’t recall ever seeing her hair this thick. She cut a deal that she would cut short her maternity leave but only if Charles would pay for triple the number of her usual hair extensions.

    • evermore says:

      The back of her hair looks like heavy extensions. Even though people may think it’s real, I am wondering, because it looks rather fake on the bottom of her hair. I’m not sure though.

  23. COSquared says:

    2015 is the year where the gloves finally come off. The number of articles that shade/call them out is very high. But this is the beginning.

  24. COSquared says:

    When Harry comes back there’s burst of “industriousness” from these 2.*crosses fingers for the Springboks*

  25. The Original Mia says:

    The dress is a definite step up. More professional. More mature without being dowdy. It’s an improvement. The hair, though…those bangs are horrible. Pinning them back on the fly was horrible.

  26. lala says:

    it looks like Kate tries to channel Angelina Jolie she so fond of. Just this very set together with her hairstyle today reminds me of one the outfits Angelina wore to one of her many charities visits. Just my opinion. If the visit was so supposed to be that “secret” as the palace stated, why bother with a perfectly matched outfit, hair, photographs? I find it not very appropriate to go meet the prisoners all dressed and made up. A bit of low – key outfit and hair style would show better what her priorities are. She just does not come as a sensible person to me.

    • Pondering thoughts says:

      It seems to me that Kate didn’t really want to go on that visit. So the palace wasn’t sure if they should announce her visit in case she decided last minute she didn’t want to go.
      Or they found this extra visit on such short notice that there wasn’t time to announce it. They decided to let her go despite not announcing it because Kate has such a bad workshy reputation that even unnanounced visits help.
      Something along those lines.

      I still remember Kate having a jolly good time and a bloody good laugh during that world war commemoration day when everybody else was drop dead serious. That day I thought she is so wrong in that place and so uncaring and so unlikeable. She was nearly rolling on the floor laughing during an event about soldiers who had given their lives to fight fascism and nazi ideology for freedom.
      I was so disgusted.

    • anne_000 says:

      I think you’re right. It’s an AJ hair cut and AJ clothes.

  27. Pondering thoughts says:

    So Kate’s reputation became so bad they now schedule in additional stuff on such short notice they don’t manage to announce it! And in order to hide that they call it “secret visit”. Which also gives them the opportunity to claim there had been more “secret visits” than anybody thought. Which would make Kate less work-shy. Or they don’t announce Kate’s work schedule in order to be able to secretly cancel visits in case Kate refuses to do it.


    • anne_000 says:

      I think you got it. You explained it far better than I could. Perfectly explained. Thanks.

    • notasugarhere says:

      That’s why those posts last year from the charity worker, SunshineHeart, were so interesting. How often they asked Middleton to visit the charity, how few invitations she accepted, how many she times she cancelled.

    • Pipa says:

      Shhh, (with so many paps around on ma carol the middletons speed dial…)!

      What’s the use of the expense to taxpayers/ RPOs… royals representing HM is suppose to bring publicity/attention to the charity/issue- from visits.

    • wolfie says:

      I read this in an article Frisbee posted yesterday. It is notable that the royals gain more in PR than the charities do in support.:

      “It is true that most royals are “patrons” of a string of charities, but very often this is only on paper – their name may appear on the letterhead, but they are not an active ambassador for that cause.

      Some royals certainly do help to raise the profile of certain charities they care about, but so do many actors, singers and sportspeople. And what about the millions of ordinary Britons who make donations and give up their free time to volunteer for good causes? They do so without any of the glory – or luxury trappings – that the royals receive.

      It’s also worth noting that when a member of the royal family visits a charity, it can cost taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds – often vastly exceeding any increase in donations. The royals gain more in PR than the charities do in support.

      But, as with the tourism argument, the amount of charity work the royals do or don’t do has no bearing on the question of whether we should have a monarchy. And of course, the Windsors would be free to continue their charitable activities as free citizens in a republic.

      - See more at: https://republic.org.uk/what-we-want/monarchy-myth-buster/royals-do-lots-charity#sthash.z79qWqg8.dpuf

      • hmmm says:

        That’s very enlightening, wolfie. Thanks. But I’m not sure how I could get any more cynical. It certainly supports my wish that the monarchy be abolished.

  28. LAK says:

    I want to give her kudos for working, but this flurry is more of their annual pattern of behaviour before a holiday, so i’ll hold on the praise.

    • The Original Mia says:

      Yep. Much ado about nothing. Just smoke and mirrors to bolster the narrative they are busy and she’s ready to jump back into her royal duties. Oh…and that they’ll need that vacation or two in the coming months.

    • Sixer says:

      Hey, LAK. Thought you might like this: a post about Her Maj’s attitude to protocol and republicanism. Author’s in the know: he’s an ex British ambassador (has upset the Establishment with anti-war activism and Scottish nationalism since leaving the Foreign Office).


      • LAK says:

        Thank you Sixer.

        In a strange way, even though he is an out-in-the-open republican, his views on the Queen actually speak well of her even if he did include the line that as long a she’s Queen she’s OK with republicanism……. a very telling sentence,no?

        Poor Jeremy Corbyn. I’m on the opposite side of the fence politically, but i’m appalled by his treatment especially by people supposed to be on his side. It almost makes me wish for his success just to see them all continue to froth at the mouth because they can’t dismiss him.

      • Sixer says:

        I thought so. She sounds eminently sensible and Murray is quite happy to state it. And it’s not as though he’s shy of criticising anyone. If he says it, I believe it.

        Clearly, Her Maj has a proper understanding of her constitutional role and accommodates anyone who is elected to office or appointed to diplomatic status, regardless of republican views. As she should. And, by extension I imagine, any British citizen who holds any democratic view on constitutional matters. I do sometimes wonder if that’s more than can be said for Charles (even though, if we must have a king, I think he’ll be a decent one).

        I quite agree about Corbyn. And I like to think, even though you and I are on different sides of the fence, if the same treatment was meted out to someone on your side of it, I’d say the same. It should be about the policies. I think all sides of the political spectrum should be hoping he keeps up the non-personal stance (and I think he will). It will improve the standard of debate in this country no end. The parliamentary Labour party should be ashamed of themselves. They’ve not appeared like bastions of democracy of late. Rather, the opposite. The party has voted. They should now get down to a policy manifesto that reflects that vote. If they do, I might even go back to Labour from the Greens!

      • wolfie says:

        It seems to me that the republicans have some very good points. However, I do not see the monarchy disappearing as long as the US and other dignitaries publically court them. Perhaps this is why Parliament considers them useful; and precisely why I can’t stand People magazine embellishing them for the American people.

      • wolfie says:

        I’m not entirely sure, but it seems that the British term republicanism is akin to the term democrats in the USA. Those are parties that are For The People. The reverse also seems to apply. The British democrats are royalist, and the Republicans are for the most part those who back banks, corporations, and the status quo.

        I’m describing an image in my mind of Ronald Reagan (an idealized past) and the Queen, yet they are completely irrelevant, and hold us back in our world full of the problems caused by the 1%.

        I’m sure Kate can be sweet – nothing personal.

      • Sixer says:

        (I’m at a wedding reception at my village hall and bit the worse for wear on scrumpy. Hooray!)

        Hmmm. Kinda sorta but not really Wolfie.

        Republicanism to a Brit simply refers to the system of government. People don’t associate it with any particular political party or any sense of left/right, liberal/conservative political beliefs.

        Having said that, those who favour a move from a constitutional monarchy to a republic tend to be on the left/liberal side of politics more so than not. Although there is a small but devoted republican strain on the right/conservative side too (the libertarian set).

        (I think I may have a headache in the morning.)

      • wolfie says:

        Thank you Sixer. l will keep trying to understand a Constitutional Monarchy – along with a House of Lords and titled folks – and voters.

      • Pondering thoughts says:

        @ Sixer

        Thanks for the link.

        I would like to gently disagree with the explanation of the Queen’s behaviour.
        If somebody tells the Queen they would prefer Britain without a monarchy then the Queen can’t do anything about that person nor about their opinion. She doesn’t have the power to behead or imprison them although the wish about abolishing government institutions can under circumstances be interpreted as high treason / terrorism.
        The Queen doesn’t do anything about anti-monarchists because she knows she can’t do anything against them.
        If you contrast this situation with the medieval and late medieval kings like Henry VIII or the French kings befor the French Revolution it is clear that those past kings would have beheaded anybody who suggested the abolition of the monarchy.

        In short kings and queens and governments have to go against those who suggest their abolition. They don’t necessarily have to go against those who wish for changes but they have to go against those who want to abolish them. It is simply self-preservation.

        I think the British Monarchy is slowly phasing out and that is a good thing. Or as my lecturer (political philosophy) recently stated: he didn’t get why the British Monarchy still existed. 21. Century and Equality and Transparency and Constitutions and Federal High Courts and all such are accepted except for the British Monarchy.

        The views of the Queen on political matters aren’t known and I think it is a shame she is under no obligation to answer questions on political matters.

      • Sixer says:

        Pondering Thoughts

        I believe that’s exactly what I said: “Her Maj has a proper understanding of her constitutional role”. That’s her role in a constitutional monarchy. I wouldn’t label that behaviour as self-preservation; I’d label it as fulfilling her role (and, by extension, not making a power grab to work it into something bigger than it is). I think you may labouring under the impression that the British constitutional monarchy is something other than it actually is.

      • Pondering thoughts says:

        @ Sixer

        The British constitutional monarchy is hardly a monarchy as the Queen has no power according to the law. However whatever powers she wields (and she does) are neither transparent nor democratically nor constitutionally controlled.
        And therefore you can question both the constitutional element as well as the monarchic element of Britain.

        By definition: A monarch is the sovereign head of state[1] in a monarchy.[2] A monarch may exercise the most and highest authority in the state or others may wield that power on behalf of the monarch. Typically a monarch either personally inherits the lawful right to exercise the state’s sovereign rights (often referred to as the throne or the crown) or is selected by an established process from a family or cohort eligible to provide the nation’s monarch.

        So whenever I ask which powers the Queen actually wield nobody can tell. According to the definition above she shouldn’t just wield “powers” but “sovereign powers” as in “the lawful right to exercise the state’s sovereign rights”.
        Does she do that? Does she not? This is neither hot nor cold nor anything.

        You could argue like this:
        Political scientist Vernon Bogdanor, paraphrasing Thomas Macaulay, has defined a constitutional monarch as “a sovereign who reigns but does not rule”.[5]

        I do quite frankly regard that as bullocks. A sovereign who doesn’t rule isn’t a sovereign. Period. And political scientists have fu**ed up more than once.
        The British governing system is hanging in limbo with a Queen who officially allegedly doesn’t rule but who can’t be controlled either and future kings down the line who are obviously not qualified. The costs are astronomous and certain accompany-ing side effects are even worse. As the highest aristocratic authority in the country the British Royal Family helps the aristocrats survive. And along with these aristocrats the class system survives.
        Germany and France and Great Britain and Russia were ruled by monarchs and aristocrats for centuries. All except Great Britain got rid of their monarchs and all except Great Britain have only a very loose and less discriminating class system. And that is the side effect of the monarch: the class system which holds back Britain in so many ways and causes so much pain. The current British government is essentially ruled by aristos/ upper class people who heap misery on the lower classes because they despise them.

    • Feeshalori says:

      When work becomes more consistent and more than an “I’m going on vacation so let’s make more visits to bump up the numbers” attitude, then I’ll give her high marks. Otherwise, I’ll hold off on the praise as well and keep the bar high as it should be for someone in her privileged position who needs to produce for that cushy lifestyle.

  29. UESider says:

    It looks like she’s been freed from her pantyhose prison as well? It doesn’t look like she’s wearing them here and I don’t think she wore them with the RL dress from the other week.

    • Imo says:

      Lol. There’s something about your name that makes me want a hot, apple drink!

    • LAK says:

      She’s definitely wearing them. Ditto previous engagement. She wears a very good brand that is ultra thin such that at a distance she looks like she is not.

      The easiest giveaway? Ankles, knees. We all have ankle/knee wrinkles and prominent ankle bone. Tights smooth those areas completely such that they look smooth and even toned.

      The other give away is to compare skin of her hands and that of her feet. Tights smooth the skin of her feet which if she wasn’t wearing, would be as visibly detailed as the skin of her hands and you’d see the bones in her feet especially as she walks.

      Finally, in some photos, the overly smooth skin of her legs is unnaturally greyish sheen that doesn’t match her facial/neck skin tone.

    • Citresse says:

      Yes, I thought she was wearing tights, they’re light grey very sheer. The DM photos are closer up so you can tell. Plus, in one photo (when Kate is seated) it looks like Kate’s shoes didn’t fit properly and you can see a wrinkle in the heel from her tights I think.
      Diana didn’t wear tights during summer and during the 80s I think it was more accepted.

    • Pondering thoughts says:

      Kate seems to pretend to wear or not wear tights. Interprete as you like.
      She is so boring. Neither fish nor meat. Neither sweet nor salty. Bland is all she is at best. And she is downright repulsive like when she had a jolly good laugh during commemoration day = commemoration of those who fought against fascism and for our freedom in the World Wars.

  30. fd says:

    why does this woman have a better work wardrobe than i do when she barely even works? I love that dress.

  31. anne_000 says:

    ” Other plans are hazy. Flunkeys are reluctant to announce too many in advance. The ‘prickly princess’ is unpredictable. A much-hyped overseas visit next spring currently awaits her nod. Come on, Kate!”
    Which means Kate is a Royal who doesn’t make plans months in advance. Because she might want cancel them at any moment. She’s “prickly” and “unpredictable.” You never know when something more fun might come up.

    The “much-hyped overseas visit” is the Caribbean tour they’re trying to make ‘official’ which means that the participating islands pay for W&K’s visit. It’s on their dime. Another freebie vacation.

    It awaits her nod. Like Kate is having a problem deciding on whether or not she wants to go to ‘work’ in the Caribbeans. Oh OK. That’s a hard one.

    “Come on, Kate!” – Yeah, come on Kate. Don’t keep us in suspense.

    I’m glad she finally went to ‘work’ where there were non-rich folks involved and no party-atmosphere to ‘coax’ her out of her ‘reclusive’ life. Hopefully she met some of the people who the program helps rather than just the officials, counselors, administration, etc.

    See folks? She’s “keen” to work. All she needed was a new haircut, new clothes, possibly a nose job, and some place she could go to “secretly” but with a photographer. After all, why make as much publicity as possible for her charities? And I highly doubt the real reason was security concerns. Were there security concerns at her other “secret visits” or at the “private meetings” that she gets credited for in her work tally?

    This was not on her public schedule, which means that if she weren’t so ‘prickly’ and ‘unpredictable,’ it would have been.

    • anne_000 says:

      I saw the photos at DM. Her hair is in her eyes. It looks like she wants to cover her face with her hair. Is her hair that important to her that she wants it to be the signature piece of her appearance?

      It looked like the real reason she visited the prison was to make sure the photogs got pictures of her hair.

    • frisbee says:

      Another irritating aspect of this story is that she is praised for a bog standard visit that other Royals would do (albeit for other Charities) as part of their normal, day to day existence. So whatever she does is held up as an example of ‘good work’ that is presented as special when the reality is that most of the time she does bugger all.
      I don’t praise my dog for going outside to poop in his ‘spot’ and I’m not going to start praising her just for doing what she’s supposed to bloody do in the first place either.

      • evermore says:

        well said , Frisbee.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The bar has been set very low for the “modern” young royals.

      • Pipa says:


        …low only for willnot *cannot middleton (no longer ‘young’ royals – 5 years in!). Even PG looking old for his age.

      • FLORC says:

        Feel good about mocking a baby’s appearance to attack the parents?

      • pat01 says:

        FLORC – I don’t get your comment, please explain??

      • hmmm says:

        It is, indeed, nothing special. And yet people and the media are falling all over themselves to pay tribute.

      • Charlotte15 says:

        @PAT01, the commenter before FLORC said that even Prince George is “looking old for his age.” FLORC was responding to that — and I happen to agree with her. Whatever we think about W&K, it crosses a line to criticize a child’s appearance IMO. (Not to mention I think PG is beyond adorable, but that is neither here nor there!)

      • frisbee says:

        Yeah I don’t think FLORC’s comment was aimed at me. I very rarely comment on anyone’s appearance (ok I made an exception for Heidi Klum’s dress the other day -eeek!) and FLORC knows that. Actually I agree, I think it’s well out of order to attack a child because of what their parents do.

      • Pondering thoughts says:

        @ Charlotte @ FLORC

        It is acceptable to criticise a child’s appearance in so far as its appearance is what Kate planned. So by criticising PG’s clothes or baby stroller you criticise Kate / William / the Royal Family / the Middletons. Though one should certainly point out that the child’s appearance is due to its parent’s plan.

        And yes, there are some things to say about PG’s appearance as planned by Kate / William. He usually wears clothes similarly to William’s baby clothes which is done to try to imply tradition and the continuation of the monarchy. Princess Charlotte was put into a near-antique over-sized lacquerated baby stroller for the same reasons.
        The whole thing indicates that Will and Kate and probably the Middleton family try to turn back time.

      • bluhare says:

        Agree with everyone re baby. I’m sure George is crying in his crayons thinking that he looks older than 2.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ Pipa

        I agree with you about how George looks. He does look old for his age.

        And I don’t think you mocking a baby’s appearance to attack the parents. It’s just the way they dress him up.

        My understanding of what you mean is that the outfits he’s put into make him seem like a kid from the last century, whether it’s the 1920s or 1950s or 1960s. It’s W&K’s way of saying they’re part of the monarchial tradition just by the mere fact that they exist regardless of what they actually do or don’t do.

        Someone mentioned that George is not seen wearing modern day kid’s clothes. Was he ever seen wearing normal kids clothes? At the beach with Carole, at the polo game, at the petting zoo? He even wears formal casual clothes, like what William did at the construction site visit. George basically wears a smaller version of what William wore yet with shorter pants.

  32. seesittellsit says:

    Outfit terrific, including the shoes (I do love grey). “Return to work” – eh, quelle surprise!

  33. Stephanie says:

    Ok, I know I am going to go down for this, but I like Benita Refson’s age-appropriate silver locks and short haircut! I had my days of lustrous brown locks. Now that I’m 57, I think Benita’s hair manages to look contemporary and fresh. And I love the DM headline, “Blue Blood is the New Black.”

    • wolfie says:

      The sad thing is that there are people who actually believe there is something in “blue blood”. (Did Kate’s turn?) Perhaps their vast and past power is what makes people shake in their boots when meeting. I imagine that the farmer who had to give a parcel of land up for their tennis court, understands.

      Now, off to check out Benita.

      • hmmm says:

        I think it’s simply the wealth. Imagine such opulence and people living within it. It awes many. And the power associated with unimaginable (i.e., taxpayer funded) wealth. It’s a big, shiny thing.

      • wolfie says:

        It seems so strange – it’s simply unAmerican – and it’s hard for me to understand why voters want would keep this unbalanced relationship of the high and lowly. It must be the fantasy of the tale they are selling – they are *entitled* to a dream life, and can do whatever they desire.

      • hmmm says:

        Well, I’m not American, wolfie. I am Canadian. I don’t think Americans have a premium on democratic outrage/idealism.

        I do think a lot of people want the fairy tale. Want to believe. And PR blighters like Jason are happy to oblige. You have to think critically to see beyond that. And that crosses all country borders.

    • wolfie says:

      Sixer, I’ve been reading all afternoon about the Constitutional Monarchy in Britain. There are many parallels with the US. I like reading that your two party system is expanding with Liberal Democrats. It is interesting to note the change of the constituency of the House of Lords over the years, and how your elected representatives can overide the appointed Lords. Your government has evolved so peacefully since Cromwell. In many ways both Canada and Britain are more progressive than the US as far as policy, even with a monarch. We have a tea party group in the US that keeps trying to hijack progressive agenda, and is always threatening to shut the government down.

  34. TessD says:

    She looks great – the hair, the suit, the shoes. A+

  35. unknown says:

    Am i the only one who thinks she looks like a british version of princess mary of denmark?

    • Pipa says:

      No. Even the colour close to a CP Mary event.

    • aaa says:

      I see similarities between Kate and Mary, although a notable dissimilarity is that Mary can be relied upon to do royal work. ;)

      I have also noticed that recently Kate has worn a couple of dresses that are similar to recent dresses worn by Sweden’s Princess Sofia. I’m pretty sure they were coincidences but I would get such a perverse thrill if the Daily Mail did an article claiming that Kate is stealing Sofia’s style.

      • unknown says:

        Yeah I agree princess mary does know how to work. I thinks it her outfits that are similar to them. It’s like everytime I see kate I just see them only without the work ethic that they have.

  36. feebee says:

    Apologies if this has already been noted but at least she didn’t wear orange or any type of stripes.

  37. sal says:

    **I apologize in advance if I missed something*** I’ve been scanning the article and comments looking for a quote from one of the prisoners saying how grateful they were to meet Kate and how awesome it was for her to take time out of her busy day to mingle with them. Couldn’t find one. Maybe it was because it was a “secret” visit? Did any of the prisoners remark upon how similar she is to Diana in terms of her personality and work ethic?

    • pat01 says:

      Maybe they flubbed their lines and director Jason decided their scenes should be left on the cutting room floor ;)

    • Charlotte15 says:

      @SAL I am loathe to quote “People” magazine, but according to their royal reporter she did speak with prisoners:

      “Once inside the prison Kate met with women who shared their stories about becoming addicts and prisoners; explaining how the RAPt program was helping them become drug, alcohol and crime free. A woman named Lacie was among those speaking with the Duchess; more from Simon Perry’s story in People.

      “As soon as she saw me, she asked me when my baby’s due,” Lacie tells PEOPLE. “And she asked if it is a boy or a girl. I told her that I’m having a boy in March and she said, ‘Oh lovely.’

      “I talked to her about my journey. She was down to earth and she had a presence that made me feel comfortable. I didn’t feel nervous at all.”

      That was all I saw in People — I don’t know if she spoke with many other prisoners.

      • anne_000 says:

        It’s interesting that she sounded as if she didn’t know one thing about the program so she stuck with something she knew, babies. If that’s all she talked about, then she should have asked them questions about the program. Is she a patron of the charity? No intellectual curiosity?

        It just reminds me of the Downtown Abbey story in which she talked about the food truck and chocolate or during the War Horse movie, she talked about how the actors look different because of facial hair. It’s like total non sequitur with her. I can’t imagine what she must have said to AJ and BP during their private meeting.

        People here keep saying that Kate smiles like a maniac in situations that don’t require such radical happy reactions. I read that someone who has met Princess Anne said Anne doesn’t smile much but she will discuss the issue at hand in a very informed and interested manner.

      • hmmm says:

        Even her responses are boring. I doubt that she had a presence that made others feel comfy. More whitewashing.

  38. Betti says:

    Ah poor Duchess Bucket – according to the Fail some of the inmates thought the VIP guest was Russell Brand.

    Imagine the disappointment when Katie Bucket turned up to show off her new dress and matching shoes.

    • frisbee says:

      Can you imagine expecting somebody interesting to turn up and Mrs Bucket arrives and they’ve nowhere to escape to. It’s enough to make them lose the will to live :)

    • ruby says:

      LOL – at least they didn’t mistake her for Diana. On a different note, what’s with the crazy smile she has in several photos? Maybe it’s those chicklet veneers, but the ear to ear grin seems highly inappropriate for the circumstances.

      • hmmm says:

        Well spotted, ruby. Why is she so ear-splittingly cheery?

      • pat01 says:

        Right on, Ruby. Those veneers make my mouth hurt — they look so obvious, unnatural and ill-fitting, but that’ just imo.

      • Pondering thoughts says:

        Perhaps she thinks that both prisons and addictions are such fun so she has a jolly good laugh. ??? It is a prison and not a tea party. Kate is just so out of her element.

      • zinjojo says:

        I’ve noticed this in all of her recent appearances, even the first pic of her new fringe when she was in the car with William. She’s smiling like her life depends on it, and it looks forced, and in this situation, inappropriate. Is it just the new veneers, or just her awkwardness and lack of ease and professional experience? She looks like a Stepford Wife.

    • hmmm says:

      Really? The man is a live wire. A shame it wasn’t him. I bet he would make a speech. Especially given that he knows all about addiction and rehab. The prison inmates wuz robbed!

  39. DK says:

    Really like the dress, hair looks better than during last week’s events, worthy cause.

    Again, a charity visit before a sports match (she’s going to a rugby match tomorrow) — so the Wimbledon outcry may have been noticed?

  40. Cricket says:

    perhaps she is just jealous with all the coverage the pope is getting! he’s put in more hours and appearances in the last 48 hours than she has all calendar year!

  41. Vava says:

    I watched the video of her on the DM, and hate that she’s always ‘talking with her hands’ and clutching that purse to her groin. The ‘fringe’ is too long………….

    • pat01 says:

      Noticed the same thing Vava. I also noticed that she was sporting that crazy grin at certain points (in the still shots). What on earth could be so amusing in such a facility? She is in way over her head and will have a hard time establishing credibility with serious causes like this. Maybe she should stick to the premieres and sporting events, interacting with celebrities?

      PS You and SavageGrace “rock” on royaldish (unless someone is using your monikers)

      • Betti says:

        I think the maniacal grin is a mix of nerves, under bite and too large veneers for her mouth. There was nothing wrong with her teeth to begin with.

      • Vava says:

        Hey pat01, thank you. I do post on Royaldish too. I agree with you, it may be difficult for Kate to establish credibility. She’s acted like a giddy school girl for so long, I really don’t think of her as a grown woman.

    • frisbee says:

      “The Duchess of Cambridge’s noticeable absence from events has seen her labelled ‘invisible’ and ‘lazy”

      Gloves are def coming off but not quite there yet.

      • LAK says:

        I think the most significant development in that article is that the DM has used the moniker ‘Duchess Dolittle’ for the first time.

        You watch, this time next year, all mainstream media will be using it.

        That’s what happened with ‘Waity Katie’. It was coined and used by the internet for some time before the mainstream media started using it.

        And as we know, once the UK press starts using a moniker for you, it’s hard to shake it off and it follows you forever. So you better hope they use a positive one.

      • Vava says:

        Some of the comments on that article are so great.

        I really don’t follow Mary, but it sounds as if she can deliver speeches, what a novel idea!!! LOL. It’s obvious Kate’s handlers don’t require her to do that since she was so uncomfortable with it early on. She could benefit from some coaching and practice, practice, practice. That’s the only way she’ll improve her image. She can’t do it with hair, legs, and wardrobe anymore. The UK deserves someone better than a Barbie Doll as a future queen consort.

      • hmmm says:


        I can’t begin to express my joy if this is true. It’s about time she was called out. I will wait a bit before I believe it. But what about Willy? Why does he get a pass?

    • Olenna says:

      *Do-Little hand-clap*

    • notasugarhere says:

      This seems less about Kate Middleton and more about Mary’s constant PR push. What other royals make a website just to celebrate them visiting New York? I think there is a lot of self-promotion involved in her Vogue photoshoots and magazine interviews. I liked Mary early on, but in recent years the PR is starting to grate.

      If you look at the Danish study about Charles being the hardest working royal in Europe, it shows that Mary and Fred worked 90 days in 2013. 90. Charles worked 189. Camilla is often labeled lazy, but she worked 124 days and Philip worked 120.

      Each royal family counts things differently, days vs. engagements, but 90 days worth of work? From that chart, that’s just above the mean. 90 days of work isn’t as bad as Mette-Marit of Norway and is roughly what Victoria and Daniel of Sweden do.

      Didn’t someone on here tell us that Letizia worked over 200 days a year in recent years before she became Queen? Denmark is the second most expensive monarchy per capita in Europe (tied with The Netherlands) and Spain is the cheapest.

      Point is, it is all relative.

    • anne_000 says:

      Thanks Maia for the article link.

      I don’t know why the UK public is OK with such a low level of involvement by W&K. I also don’t understand why they have any apologists who even make up sicknesses to cover for W&K’s laziness.

  42. Charlie says:

    Wiglet watch peeps (Bluhare?), please tell me I am not the only one to see a large wiglet at the top/back of her head. The crown of her head is just way too high to be natural! I can’t unsee it! (I haven’t read all the comments, so forgive me if this has already been mentioned.)

  43. SavageGrace says:


    That is all.

  44. Tough Cookie says:

    She does such weird things with her hands, always trying, I’m guessing, to make sure EVERYONE SEES she is wearing the big blue ring of doom.

  45. smd says:

    You know, I could deal with some of this wiglet, extension craziness if she owned it! I work with some fabulous ladies who change their hairstyles dramatically weekly, they love it
    own it and rock It. I admire their fearlessness, dedication and honesty :) Kate refuses to give up her eyeliner, OK while I don’t agree, I get it. If she was truly comfortable in her ensembles she would come off more confident and genuine…

  46. lila fowler says:

    Her hair is so bad, I cannot get past it. How does natural hair like that end up looking like a wig? The severe curl under must stop. She needs help.