Duchess Kate: Prince George would rather play with ladybugs & pigeons

wenn23078800

Here are some assorted photos of the Duchess of Cambridge from her many events this week. She worked her fingers to the bone! And now she’s resting. She didn’t do any events yesterday and I don’t think she has anything scheduled for today? But I still enjoy looking at photos of Kate’s many events, mostly because… why doesn’t she work like this all the time? She’s allowed to pass off so many fun events as “work,” so why not do all of these fun appearances all the time? But of course, we’re supposed to be giving Kate a break. So says The Daily Mail’s Amanda Platell, who wrote a piece called “For pity’s sake leave her alone!” a few days ago – you can read the full piece here. I don’t even believe it’s worth discussing, because it’s written like some unhinged rant by a crazy royal-stan. Blah.

I’m much more interested in what Kate was actually saying when she was doing her many events this week. Apparently, when she stopped by Chance UK on Tuesday, Kate chatted about Prince George with the kids. Kate recently took George to the Natural History Museum – you can see a photo here – and George wasn’t interested in the exhibits. George wanted to spend more time with the pigeons.

Kate told how she took George to see the dinosaur skeletons at the Natural History Museum last week but he was more interested in the pigeons outside. She also revealed that the third in line to the throne, a future King, is fascinated by insects, especially ladybirds.

The mother-of-two opened up about her elder child when she met young people from the charity Chance UK, which mentors vulnerable children across the capital who are at risk of offending.

She sat down with Carl Goddard, 10, from Haringey, north London, and his mentor Claire Butler, 29. Carl showed Kate a picture of him at the Natural History Museum with a fox. He said: “She was telling me that she took George to the Natural History Museum.” They went there last Thursday.

Claire added: “She said that George was more interested in a pigeon they found there rather than all the amazing exhibits. Carl told her about the fox that he saw and she was interested in that.”

Kate also sat down with Faith Buchanan, who is nine next week, and her mentor Elizabeth Little, 33, and saw a picture Faith had drawn and cut out of a princess during a trip to the Museum of Childhood. The future Queen was amused when she saw written on the back were qualities Faith thought a princess should possess. Elizabeth said: “We pointed out one of the qualities is special powers and she said she wished she had special powers.”

Faith said: “We were talking about insects and she said George likes them.”

[From Express]

It wasn’t until just at this very moment that I realized that British people say “ladybirds” and Americans say “ladybugs.” The more you know! They’re the same insect. I too loved ladybugs when I was a kid – how could you not? Ladybugs are amazing! And I think George is amazing too – that kid would much rather watch pigeons and play with bugs than have to do boring stuff with his mom.

wenn23078808

wenn23077630

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

87 Responses to “Duchess Kate: Prince George would rather play with ladybugs & pigeons”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. kcarp says:

    So basically he is a normal kid? Give him a box and a bug and he is happy all day?

    • SNAP says:

      Buy them a toy and watch them amuse themselves with the toy’s box all day…if it’s a noisy toy then they will push the buttons ALL day til you find a screwdriver small enough to get the stinking batteries out…lol…typical kid stuff. I hate to admit i watch Peppa Pig with my daughter, by golly, even as an adult i find myself learning all these British words and slang from the cartoon. I think that’s where i heard “ladybird” for the first time…or “i’m going to collect the children”…it’s funny when she speaks with a British accent, she does it pretty good…wish i could do that, but i’m accent impaired.

  2. flotsam says:

    He just sounds like a toddler to me.

    • Cupcake says:

      Exactly! This is not amazing, newsworthy behavior that makes him unique. It’s typical age-appropriate behavior.

    • zinjojo says:

      Yep, PG is like most two-year olds; and museum exhibits are not exactly what they’re interested in at that point. Most would rather chase the birds and look at bugs.

  3. vauvert says:

    Well that is natural. He is way too young to find museums fascinating, give him a few years. The zoo and aquarium and pigeons and ladybugs and rabbits in the yard are all going to be so much more fascinating for a kid his age. (If this is part of the “we’re so normal” narrative, props to adorable George for being the only one doing his part well:-))

    • Jan says:

      That’s what I thought too. He’s much too young for museums. Kids his age love nature – birds, bugs, fish, leaves, puddles, stones, sand. Surely she should know this.

      • Paleokifaru says:

        Actually I am a curator at a natural history museum and I also run educational programs and preschoolers do love them. Obviously you keep the activities age appropriate but we consistently have preschool groups enjoying the museum. Just like with any other age, they don’t have to be fascinated with every little bit to have a good time.

      • Sixer says:

        The Natural History Museum has loads for little kids. What would be kindergarteners in the US? But for both what we call Early Years and Key Stage 1:

        http://www.nhm.ac.uk/schools/things-to-do-schools.html

        (Although, I think the Science Museum is best for little ones).

      • Lemonsorbet says:

        Our 3yo son totally loves the Tate Modern. If he likes a picture, he gives them names and describes them, helping him be more articulate. Of course, there are other art that just get him to nod off too, making that gallery one of our favourite places in the city. If you were to ask him though, he’d tell you with confidence that he’d much prefer the London Transport Museum. Rainy days are perfect for museum visits.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I used to lead a little lecture tour for kids at a museum. They were required to be six. We had a lady who insisted her four year old and friends would be mature enough to hold a party there, with tour included. It was a nightmare. They started crying and telling me “you said we would have cake!” And “this is boring!” Finally one of them asked “when is this over?” and I said “now!” Lol

  4. Esteph says:

    Aw…more George, less Kate. Wait wait wait, more Harry, less everyone else 😉

    • zinjojo says:

      Ha! More Harry indeed!

      Last night, my husband (he’s Welsh, and generally pays exactly zero attention to anything royal) made the comment that he hopes Harry becomes king instead of William, along with noting that William seems a bit churlish. I guess he pays more attention than I thought 🙂

      • Paula says:

        I hope Harry doesn’t become the next King as the only way for that to happen is if William and his two children where to die. While William could abdicate he can’t do that for his kids.

      • LAK says:

        Paula, death isn’t the only way Harry can become King instead of William. All William has to do is remove himself from the line of succession and or abdicate when he is King. It’s happened on a few occasions in history – see Henry 2 and Edward 8

        Further, as we have an unwritten constitution, and as shown by all the other abdications, if William wanted to take the kids out as well or Parliament decided it wasn’t a good thing to keep them in the line, a law can be written to kick them out too – see the Stuart line.

  5. Lindy79 says:

    I’m really hoping that Prince George turns out to have his uncle’s sassy pants.

    I have no idea why we say Ladybirds, but there was children’s books published by Ladybird which were a staple in the Lindy household growing up.

    • AtlLady says:

      Just as a funny piece of history, Lyndon B. Johnson was the only US President that Queen Elizabeth II never met during her reign so far. Scheduling conflicts were always blamed. Makes you kind of wonder if the real reason is that neither HM nor (or especially) Prince Philip would be able to keep a straight face when being introduced to Mrs. Johnson, who was known to all by her nickname of Lady Bird. Those differences in British and American English can be a hoot. LOL

      • teacakes says:

        lol yes, I come from a country where we call them ladybirds too, and I always wondered how anyone said Mrs Johnson’s name with a straight face until I realised Americans call them LadyBUGs.

        The only Ladybug I know is the MAC lipstick shade by that name, but it’s a great lipstick so I don’t mind.

  6. kelsey says:

    Yawn… Moving on to next post – even a Kardashian one would be more interesting

  7. DaSH says:

    I saw that museum photo and George is so cute with his side curl hair. And, can we blame him for being more interested with moving birds and insects?

    • Olenna says:

      That side-curl was cute. It’s reminds me of Hermey the Elf’s ‘do from Rudolph the Red-nose Reindeer.

      • antipodean says:

        Big G does have an amazing head of hair. I wonder if it will eventually go the same way as his father’s? Those Windsor genes are strong. Or maybe he will end up like Uncles Harry and James with hair sprouting from everywhere.

      • aaa says:

        My biggest curiosity about George is not whether he will be a good or bad guy, introverted or extroverted, but will he defy the Windsor genes and keep a full head of hair at least until he’s 40.

      • What's inside says:

        You are so right. I had not even thought of that. He would look so cute dressed up as an elf.

  8. TheEntrepreneursWife says:

    I spy her wig in the second photo and now I can’t unsee it. Her hair is two totally different colors.

    I’ve gotten a better styling from my $15 Supercuts blowout.

  9. Mia V. says:

    He’s 3, it’s obvious he isn’t interest.

  10. Betti says:

    Even those these photo’s were clearly taken my another visitor a part of me things that its still pap walk PR from the Cambridges to push the narrative that they are normal family people who do normal family things. Whoever took it was close – close enough for an RPO to spot and stop them. Just saying.

    • aaa says:

      A RPO cannot stop someone from taking a picture, they can go up and request that the picture not be taken or be deleted. IIRC they did that in this case, I would not be surprised if multiple people took pictures and either the person who sold the picture refused, or said they would delete the photo, did not and then turned around and sold the photo.

      I suspect that the RPOs automatically go to the picture takers and request they not take pictures/delete pictures in order to exert some level of control and to not create a “market” but there are occasions in the past when the Cambridges have not always created a fuss over candid photos, probably because at some level they think that particular photo is a positive.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The RPOs have physically taken phones in the past. See the Switzerland example.

      • aaa says:

        I’ve read about the Switzerland incident in comments but have never seen the video. From the descriptions I read, it looked like the guy was trying to engage Kate and presumably was fairly close to her, that then gave the RPOs cause to deal with him. I am not saying that they had to take the camera, but I’ve even seen that happen with celebrities and their security where they will take the opportunity to take a camera or delete pictures/video.

        I can also believe that a RPO can get overzealous and cross the line but in general, if the person is keeping their distance, the way that is typically handled is for the RPO/security to politely request the photo be deleted.

        I am curious how many RPOs are present, because if it is only one or two, and one has to go and deal with picture takers, then is that leaving the royal vulnerable.

      • LAK says:

        AAA: RPOs are first and foremost policemen with authority to stop harassment of their charges as they see fit. They aren’t regular bodyguards. Of course the first thing to do is to contain the situation so that it doesn’t become an incident, but if they have to be aggressive, the law allows them to be, and they have been in the past for some royals. I’ve witnessed it myself.

        Their version of polite containment is very firm. You are left in no doubt at all that you should comply.

        There is a reason you rarely have pap photos of any of the royals. Trust me, they aren’t hiding in their palaces or estates so that you never see them. The few photos that we have over the years are always snatched photos. Nothing like the pap situation we saw when Diana and Kate didn’t have RPOs which allowed said paps to get close to them without fear of reprisals.

        As for the video from Switzerland, it’s unclear as to whether it was a case of ongoing harassment or a first offense, but the RPO’s aggression is unmistakable.

      • LAK says:

        AAA: Re: your final question, each royal has a minimum of 3 RPOs working 2 at a time, so for a Kate + PGtips outing, they’ll definitely have, at minimum, 4 guards.

        When William and Kate are about, they tend to travel with as many as 6 RPOs.

      • aaa says:

        @LAK,
        I agree with most of your comment and don’t see how it disagrees with what I’ve previously stated. If someone with a camera is in close proximity of a royal that can be considered harassment and the RPOs can certainly deal with that person. That is different than someone standing 10 yards away taking a picture, that is not harassment and their recourse is to approach the person and politely ask them to delete the photo. Yeah maybe their way of “politely asking” has a tinge of menace to it causing the person to immediately comply, but if someone is feeling their oats and makes it known that they will not comply, the RPOs cannot force them to do it without possibly setting themselves up to be the harassers.

        As far as not seeing many photos of royals, I don’t know if many of the people who spot a royal feels compelled to whip out their cameras and take a picture, assuming that they even try since the royal will probably be in the car or building in the time it takes to get out the camera. Oftentimes when there’s a sighting, someone tweets about it with no picture, and the few times there is a photo, it is very low quality.

        Regarding the Switzerland incident, if the other person was harassing Kate, it doesn’t matter if it is a first offense or ongoing, it is the RPOs job to deal with the harasser.

        ETA:
        Thanks for responding to my question about RPOs. The number two was stuck in my head but I did not know if in a group outing it is still 2 per royal or if there is doubling up. I guess it can go either way depending on the event/environment.

      • notasugarhere says:

        People standing by the side of a ski run or cafe at a ski resort taking photo with their phones from many yards away are not “harassing”.

        The number of RPOs varies. She took 8-9 RPOs with her to sneak around picket lines at a hotel last year to attend her cousin’s wedding.

    • herewego says:

      The photo was taken by a school teacher out on a day trip to the museum.
      She just thought they were cute photos w Kate and George. She posted them to her own blog, but then the press saw them and offered her some $ and friends told her why not take the $ offer?

  11. LAK says:

    For someone lauded for being tightlipped, she’s incredibly loose lipped. To strangers.

    She continually gives out private information about her family when William is jealously guarding it to the point many consider him irrationally paranoid.

    • herewego says:

      That’s the thing, when Kate is out on her own or William is not standing just near, she does talk a bit.

    • notasugarhere says:

      So true. Like the d og’s name was a secret until she told. Taking about herself and sharing tidbits about the kids makes the event about her and not the event itself.

      • MinnFinn says:

        nota, I also noted that Kate made the conversation about herself and her family. I would be less bothered if she were at one of her fun events. But geeze Katy Bucket, you’re talking to a troubled 10 year old, why can’t you focus solely on his needs for 10 continuous minutes.

        And how is it that her visit last Thursday to a science museum is just coming out now? AFAIK there was not even a contemporary twitter sighting about it.

      • Herewego says:

        A teacher took the photos, only the foreign press would use them, the British press is too afraid or was too afraid until tweeters started tweeting the photos from the teachers blog or the foreign press who used it.

        Kate mentioned the George story on her outing a few days ago when someone asked her about it, but At that point the British press was still keeping the story out of it’s pages, they let Kate discuss it publicly first before they Wrote of it.

        William has put fear into the British press on some matters in his life

      • Pondering thoughts says:

        Well, I can imagine that George will be asked in 20 years if he still liked ladybirds /ladybugs. And whether he wanted to create a royal order of ladybirds.

        How comes that some charity visit ends up with us knowing about George’s visit to some museum and George’s liking for ladybirds but no information about the charity?

  12. Bee says:

    I like the outfit she wore to the museum.

  13. astrobiologiste says:

    Well…. looking at the dine exhibit (or any exhibit) at the NHM in London is not boring!!!

    I am a biologist, a museum nerd, and biased—NHM is my Disneyland.

  14. M.A.F. says:

    Ha! I didn’t even notice it was written as “ladybird”.

  15. Citresse says:

    Ladybird Johnson?

  16. Sixer says:

    That dress! I still can’t get over it. It’s like when someone gets their sofa re-covered with a nasty one-size-fits-all floral flouncy thing. Yuck.

    Ladybirds rock. Ladybirds are also popular because one of the first science topics in the National Curriculum for pre-schoolers here is “minibeasts”. Ladybirds feature strongly. The Sixlets had minibeast-themed Top Trumps!

  17. herewego says:

    Sounds like a normal kid. I give my nieces a gift, they play with the box and bow instead and then go chase the dog. LOL

    Interesting twitter thread about William doing his own charity outing the night Kate did her’s in this colorful dress, but for Jecca Craigs charity, which he wanted kept away from the press.
    William held a event for Jecca’s charity , while Kate was getting the press, but none of the press was invited to William’s or even got wind of it until last minute. I just wonder why he felt the need to keep it private, its a charitable organization?

    P.S. Jecca recently married.

    • notasugarhere says:

      If the purpose of a charity event is to raise awareness and money, why does he keep hiding the events? This is not the first time he’s done this, it became a strong pattern in the last 18 months. Petulant and passive-aggressive.

      • MinnFinn says:

        It was the private and intimate 2-person after-party he did not want publicized, that’s why the main event was held on the QT.

      • Herewego says:

        Tanna said he heard she had married and saw something somewhere?

        Concerning the private event, William had that on sneaky press lockout and did a good Bait and Switch game (Kate the press bait ..all cameras at her event on her colorful dress and earrings….Switch….William across Town at his own private outing, aiding Jecca’s charity…..no cameras or no press over there covering it.

        ….but I bet anything some photos will emerge one day….unless he had all phones collected at the event. I think it must have been a small gathering and in a privàte room at seafood restaurant they had it in?

        Ingrid Sewerd said years ago William is very sneaky, does a lot behind scenes the public never sees. 🙂

        Rumors are Jecca’s husband and Willam have become good friends and William worked on a Tusk event with him or vice versa.

    • The Original Mia says:

      herewego, where did you hear Jecca had married? I’ve seen no news about it.

  18. Tough Cookie says:

    “We pointed out one of the qualities is special powers and she said she wished she had special powers”

    Just a little work ethic would be fine.

  19. anne_000 says:

    Hope that in their AH budget (that they’ve been spending on destroying the old pool and tennis court and building new ones a few feet away and creating a karaoke room), they spent some money on a flower garden (to attract ladybugs and birds) and a bird bath and a big bag of birdseed. You know, something for the kids to enjoy.

  20. dippit says:

    Seems a natural conversation for a mum to have when speaking to other children in a semi-official, but as casual as these things can ever be made in the circs, capacity. I often think, given she knows her every move and word is going to be reported (authorised or not) and scrutinised, that when she’s going about this work she must be at pains to strike the right balance. I think her telling tales of George is her way of keeping it as natural as possible for everyone concerned. I don’t imagine it an easy balance to strike.

    I was told (third, maybe fourth, hand) of a visit she did a while back with kids. The voluntary worker (original source) was surprised at how impressively KM handled things and engaged with the children. The phrase used was “she walked in a Princess to the kids, but left as a nice woman they’d had a lovely time with”.

    I’m not much of a fan in general, and do think she could be less cherry pick on official duties, but I did think that spoke well of her. Yes, maybe it’s good for her image to be known to do these visits, but if her way of going about doing them (tales of George and all) relaxes everyone (including herself) into just having pleasant moments, I can’t knock that.

    • bluhare says:

      That is nice to hear! Maybe she’s someone who does better when cameras aren’t focused on her.

  21. My two cents says:

    She looks really pretty in the pic with her hair pulled back. I imagine the kids she talked to loved hearing about the little Prince. Maybe William is secretive because he’s especially paranoid about keeping his family safe. When you have the public scrutiny they have, extremely disturbed people can come out of the woodwork to do harm.

    • LAK says:

      That’s certainly a consideration, but many people who deal with him, going back to when he was a child, comment on his need for secrecy. ‘very secretive’ is an often used description for William. It creates problems for those wishing to work with him, nevermind the external issues eg media.

      I’m not suggesting that he shouldn’t be concerned for his security or privacy, but his need for privacy is probably fuelled by his need for secrecy.

  22. Tessd says:

    Ladybugs are called “God’s Little Cows” in Russia. Probably because they produce a milky white excrement when crawling about.

    • MinnFinn says:

      So would the Russian to Anglo-English translation be cow-bird and to ‘American’ it would be cow-bug?

      • FLORC says:

        Maybe a year ago A ladybug landed on my glass as I went to take a sip. I quickly spit the bug out before i realised there was one in my mouth. They bleed out of their legs I think that produces a terrible taste and left my tongue a bit numb for 20 minutes. Talking was fun after that.
        Interesting little creatures.

  23. What was that says:

    Kaiser…
    Unhinged is a good description on Amanda Platell..!!!
    Her rants in the Daily Fail are increasingly common…
    The Fail can bring out the worst in people and is designed to..equivalent to your Fox News
    It is supposed to claim it speaks for Middle England..wherever that is….The Editors of the print editions are legendary for their bile especially towards anyone remotely “Leftie”
    I used to say that as an old lady ,home alone I would never buy the Fail as I would be too scared to leave the house..murder and mayhem on every page..then Drinking Red Wine is Bad…then eating xxx is bad…you would turn into a nervous wreck

    • Pondering thoughts says:

      @ What was that

      I think you delievered a quite good explanation and dissection of the Daily Mail. Today there is less crime than four decades ago but the tabloids make you think it all got worse.

      Amanda Platell is like those women who walk certain streets at night in skimpy underwear.
      Her love can be bought.
      Sometimes she is bought by her audience when she criticises Waity Katie for being lazy. As most people think that Waity is lazy.
      And sometimes she writes to defend Kate – I suppose Buckingham Palace had a few words with her when people didn’t really believe nor praise Kate’s latest worky worky attitude.

  24. Pondering thoughts says:

    At what age would you bring your child to a natural history museum?
    Seeing a dinosaur in a book is one thing. Seeing a real dinosaur skeleton is quite another.

    I don’t have kids so I wouldn’t really know. But George seems to be rather young for such a trip.

    • Sochan says:

      No, he’s the perfect age. Children experience AWE before they experience fear. Adults often make the huge mistake of thinking a child is frightened when the child is actually in awe and speechless. Yanking the child away and avoiding so-called “scary places” (scary according to WHOM? Children have no reference point for fear at this age) is what actually creates fear because they associate certain places and things with the adult’s negative reaction.

    • FLORC says:

      I still go. It’s still fascinating. Think I was 3 and i’ve seen kids at around 2 taking it all in with big eyes.

    • may23 says:

      I would at any age, as soon as I can take them out of the house! The more they see, hear, feel, the better and the earlier, the better as well.

  25. LizzyFizzy says:

    I actually think there’s something a little sad about her feeling more comfortable talking when she’s by herself and William isn’t there, if that’s true–does that mean he’s a dominant personality and she’s afraid of upsetting him by saying something ‘wrong’? Eek. Not good. Not good at all.

    • Herewego says:

      She has to probably hold a lot of her own thoughts in with William.
      She spent a decade catering to him, so doubt that has changed much once married.

      • Sochan says:

        Yes! I was about to say something similar. You nailed it.

        Her identity from the age of 20 is wrapped up in him. She basically went to college to be near him — not to learn. She did sports/outdoors stuff to keep busy — rather than settling on something to excel at for her future. She exhibits no personality of her own, no interests of her own. She is a blank slate to me. I can’t imagine her excited about something, or angry about something, or feeling righteous indignation about anything, or laughing. I don’t even know what her voice sounds like.

      • aurelia says:

        Let’s not forget William married his stalker.

      • FLORC says:

        aurelia
        And she married her enabler. It’s a Win/Win!

  26. Sochan says:

    Am I the only one who keeps forgetting she has a daughter??

    The dress is awful, the boy is adorrrrrrable. LOVE HIM.