Prince William & Kate don’t want their kids exposed to royal Christmas traditions

wenn29585179

The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh delayed their annual train ride to Sandringham yesterday due to “heavy colds” for both. If they have the same cold that I’ve been battling all week, it’s a bad one and for the first three days, you feel like you’ve been hit by a truck. The fact that the 90-year-old Queen and the 95-year-old Prince Philip are both sick as hell just serves as reminder that they are, in fact, quite old and they might not have that many Christmases left. Which makes it extra interesting that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge happened to choose this year to completely shun the royal family’s Christmas plans, from the Christmas Eve gift-giving to the Christmas Day church visit to the Boxing Day hunt. The Cambridges won’t be around for any of it. Obviously, people have remarked about Will and Kate’s seeming insolence, so their press secretary Poor Jason pretty much dropped this story to the Daily Mail:

William and Kate have broken royal protocol by turning down the Queen’s traditional celebrations at Sandringham in favour of a merry Middleton Christmas this year. It may well smack of favouritism towards Kate’s family, but according to experts the decision was in fact made to put George and Charlotte’s needs first. According to experts, a relaxed family Christmas at the Middletons will be much more suitable for the youngsters than the strict formality of Sandringham.

‘The decision has been made out of a desire to put Charlotte and George first,’ parenting expert Lisa Clegg told MailOnline. ‘If William and Kate can take a step back from Official Royal duties at certain times, in order to keep life as simple and normal as possible for George and Charlotte then that’s absolutely the right decision.’

Christmas at Sandringham is run like a military operation with everything from guests’ arrival time to when they eat breakfast, walk the dogs, sit down to lunch and retire to bed strictly timetabled. Even lunch on Christmas Day is pencilled in for just 50 minutes. Meanwhile Pippa has described the Middleton Christmas as ‘blissfully calm’ and lots of fun, with father Michael even donning fancy dress such as a sumo wrestler suit to lived up proceedings.

Lisa who has recently released an e-book for Bepanthen, What the Parenting Manuals Don’t Tell You, said that this is a much better environment for young children rather than the strict protocol at Sandringham.

‘The children are still very young and so won’t understand the restraints that have to be practised within certain obligations of the Royal family and to sit down and be quiet in particular situations,’ she explained. ‘They are only little and need to be able to be children and get carried away with the excitement and fun of Christmas, without the world looking on them. For this reasons, it’s beneficial for them to be in a more relaxed environment.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“If William and Kate can take a step back from Official Royal duties at certain times…” Like, when are they NOT taking a step back? Last year, the Cambridges had the Middletons stay at Anmer Hall, and Will and Kate split their time between the two families, and I don’t even think Charlotte and George spent that much time with the royal family. That was the whole point of giving Anmer Hall to Will and Kate. Why would it have to be different this year? I doubt the Queen would have been like, “small children must adhere to the schedule at all times!” And even then, surely exposing the future king of England to royal traditions would be a good thing? But really, this is just another example of Will and Kate using their kids as a shield from criticism. William in particular does this all the time. To hear William tell it, getting Carole to set up a faux-royal bird-shooting party probably benefits George and Charlotte too.

wenn29619442

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

340 Responses to “Prince William & Kate don’t want their kids exposed to royal Christmas traditions”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. AfricanBoy says:

    What’s the point of keeping the British monarchy when they (young royals) don’t care about royal traditions?

    • Nic919 says:

      Exactly. Will is a dummy. British monarchy exists only because it’s a tradition and an expensive one at that. If he isn’t willing to do any of it, why should the taxpayers continue funding his lavish lifestyle.

      And Will is going to be gone shooting birds all day on Boxing Day, so how are the kids involved in that?

      • Eleonor says:

        Funny thing is: if the taxpayers stopped funding his ridicolous lifestyle, he would do what ?
        WORK ? AH.

    • Hannah says:

      Tourism.

      • NastyWoman` says:

        I thought it had been proven that the royals don’t increase tourism very much. People seemed enthralled by the real estate – the palaces and castles – but not the actual royals (beyond the queen, that is).

      • Nic919 says:

        Versailles is far busier than any British palace.

      • zappy says:

        nope.. no one comes to England to see RF. versailles doing fine without it..
        funding RF is way more expensive..

      • Megan says:

        Admissions to royal palaces in Britain bring upwards of £50 million pounds per year, so yes, the BRF does generate tourist revenue. Versailles is one of the largest and most opulent royal residences in the world. It is steeped in history and mythology. To compare it to any other European attraction is pointless.

      • Sixer says:

        http://www.alva.org.uk/details.cfm?p=423

        Most visited tourist attractions. None from 1 to 230 are anything to do with the current royals. None.

        Megan – the vast majority of the income from visits to royal-associated venues and ex palaces (eg Hampton Court, the Tower of London) are nothing to do with the extant royal family. They are comparable to Versailles in that they are about our heritage and history. Bugger all to do with the Windsors.

      • Karli says:

        I’d like to see the palaces, castles etc. but I wouldn’t fly to the UK because of the royal family. It’s not like there’s a big chance to see any of them anyway.

      • Seraphina says:

        Sixer, exactly right. I want to visit London for it’s history not TRF. The great palaces of the world no longer have royal inhabitants but they still have tourism.

        It’s an excuse to use Tourism as the crutch for keeping the TRF. The more people are fed that fiction, the harder it will be to remove them.

        2017 is around the corner and the heir to the throne has shown time and time again he does not want the privilege of what comes with his title. Time to remove him from his misery.

      • LAK says:

        Megan:Regularly conducted polls from every UK tourist board rarely list the royals for tourism. Infact, the only royalty steeped item in their top 20 reasons for visiting the UK is the Tower of London and only because people think of it as a prison and Keeper of the crown jewels and not the fact that it is a royal Palace.

        The idea that the royal family is a tourist attraction is about as true as that 56p often quoted figure of their cost.

        People love royal history and will visit places associated with them, but the British tourism industry has many more reasons that promote it than the royal family.

      • Megan says:

        LAK and Sixer – Did I say people go to England just for the BRF? No, I did not. What I said is that the BRF does generate tourist dollars and it is intellectually dishonest to insist they do not. They also generate other forms commerce, like say ad revenue on the DM.

      • LAK says:

        Megan: The charge is that the WINDSORS bring in tourist money and there is no evidence to support that claim beyond the PR statements that keep repeating it.

        We have evidence that they do not.

        1. The lists of tourist attractions/ reasons, regularly updated.

        2. The £50M figures you are quoting primarily comes from Historical Royal Palaces who manage EMPTY palaces not associated with the Windsors except for KP eg Hampton Court, Kew Palace, the tower of London, banquenting Hall, Hillsborough Castle.

        3. BP, closely associated with the Windsors, is open for only a few weeks a year. There is no corresponding change in visitor numbers to the other British Palaces during the weeks that BP is open.

        4. Windsor Castle, closely associated with the Windsors, doesn’t figure in the top 100 reasons/ attractions people visit the UK and that is open all year round.

        5. KP is better known for the royals past than royals present, but it has been redesigned to attract visitors in ways that aren’t strictly royalty inspired. Most of it’s exhibitions showcase royals past.

      • Sixer says:

        No, Megan, you didn’t. What you did was create a connection between tourist visits to historic royal palaces and the current royal family, which is a false equivalence because the correct analogy is with Versailles. And quite how commercial celebrity column inches on a gossip newspaper is a unique benefit to the UK solely due to the royals defeats me entirely. NOTHING about the Daily Fail benefits me as a British taxpayer.

      • Lena says:

        You can’t even visit Buckingham Palace most of the time because of the queen!

      • Megan says:

        LAK and Sixer – So those crowds we saw images of at the Queen’s jubilee weren’t there for the BRF and didn’t generate any tourist dollars? I see.

      • Sixer says:

        Megan, nobody is saying the BRF doesn’t bring a penny in tourist revenue. People are saying that it’s a proven canard that they PAY FOR THEMSELVES in tourist revenue. They don’t. They cost far, far more than they bring in. And you can misattribute heritage tourist POUNDS all you like, it still won’t make them BRF tourist POUNDS.

        We’re an old country. We’ve got heritage. It attracts millions of tourists and brings in significant income. We’re a constitutional monarchy. We’ve got royals. They sell a bit of merchandise, open a palace of theirs for a couple of weeks a year and have the occasional event that attracts thousands, not millions, of tourists. They bring in some minor income but that income is surpassed by the amount it costs to keep them.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Crowds at Queen’s jubilee — weren’t they most likely to be Londoners?

        There may be a better argument for supporting the BRF because tourism isn’t it.

      • Rachel says:

        @Megan
        Whatever tourist revenue was generated from people coming to see the Jubilee – and I’d seriously question how many of those people were from out of town and paying for accommodation, food, etc. – was swamped by the astronomical security costs of protecting the royals and VIPs at that event.
        Even William and Kate’s wedding was apparently an economic hit to the tune of £5-6bn because the public holiday created two four-day weekends in April 2011. The tourist revenue for that event was only estimated at around £1bn.

      • Spiderpig says:

        I bet anything the palaces would bring in a lot more money if we got rid of the RF and ran the palaces as purely tourist attractions.

      • Katydid20 says:

        Tourism? I dunno, it’s not like we get to visit them like animals at the zoo and feed Willy bread.

      • Bonzo says:

        It’s fruitless arguing with Sixer and LAK. Years of commenting here have shown they know their sh!t when it comes to the English monarchy. I defer to them.

        I would happily spend the money I don’t currently have to visit England for the history, the arts and its natural beauty. The presence/absence of the monarchy doesn’t impact my tourism dollars, since watching the Changing of the Guard at BP is free. The money spent at The Tower was due to its history, not the current BRF.

      • Kitty says:

        @Hannah did you know only 500M watched their wedding not the 2B that was reported? It was proven false!

      • Megan says:

        @Kitty – Of course 2 billion people did not watch the wedding. That would be something approching one in four humans. Once you rule out those without access to TV, those too young or too old to tune in, etc. you have a considerably smaller pool of potential viewers. The only broadcast to ever capture 1 billion viewers was the opening of the Olympics in Beijing, which means you need massive interest from China to approach that scale.

        If the 500 million number is correct, that is still massive when you consider the U.K. has a population of about 65 million.

      • Kitty says:

        @Megan, well Diana wedding was watched by 750M.

      • Megan says:

        @Kitty – Charles and Diana married in a different era and had an extravagant wedding that brought to together royalty and other dignitaries from all over the world. Not to mention the whirlwind/fairytale aspect of the their brief courtship. Kate And William had a much lower key wedding and a boring courtship that dragged on for a decade and hundreds of millions of people still tuned in.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Anne’s first wedding drew an estimated 500 million viewers.

      • Kitty says:

        @Megan, if William is going to be future King then why did not a lot of dignitaries all around the world attend his wedding?

      • Tanya says:

        I hear tourism used as a reason a lot. But, I must say, when I travel to London, the monarchy isn’t on my scheduled plans. Is that the reality of the city?

      • Megan says:

        @Kitty – Because they were not invited. The U.K. Was experiencing an economic downturn when they married and an over-the-top wedding would have been seen as garish and distasteful.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Because trees uprooted, dragged into Westminster Abbey, and blocking off the view of the beautiful building wasn’t garish, distasteful, and over-the-top? It was an absolutely ridiculous wedding, complete with her enormously expensive two gowns. 5-6 billion overall lost to the economy because of the date they insisted on. St Catherine’s Day (and Hitler and Braun’s anniversary too).

        The difference was, William pitched a fit and put forward the silly (and fictional) idea of a “semi-state” wedding. As in, the costs were still mostly borne by the people, but William didn’t have to invite heads of state if he didn’t want to.

        It also meant that he demanded that only his friends be allowed at the reception. HM had to scramble to organize a separate event so many of the guests, including other royals, were fed.

      • Kitty says:

        @Megan and @Nota, maybe when Harry gets married a lot of dignitaries will be invited and attend. Will make his wedding seem bigger than William’s. Probably would piss him off though 🙂

    • Redgrl says:

      Exactly! George best get used to it as the heir.smacks of entitlement. There was always a magical almost other-worldliness to the Queen – however you felt about the monarchy, she was always consistent and diligent and took her duties seriously. Here is no magic to the younger set – just some spoiled entitled millennial who want all the perks & none of the responsibility. If they’re just another bunch of rich kids, then let’s get rid of them after theQueen passes…

      • carolr says:

        Perfect answer. The magic will be gone after TQ. These two come across as spoilt and bratty, lazy and lacking in both style and substance. It’s rather sad actually as it paints a reflection of a generation and this shouldn’t be so. The Queen represents all that is good about the older generation – service, sacrifice, love of family, God and country, while these two represent all that is bad about the younger one – entitlement, self before others, me, me me. I know perfectly well that this is a generalisation but surely they should be doing more to demonstrate positive qualities, by working more and harder and by not shunning all traditon while retaining all the privileges.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Wait’ll George grows up and wants to spend Christmas with *his* in-laws, too.

      • Redgrl says:

        Thanks CarolR! I share your comments about the older/younger generations too…(I realize my “exactly” is kind of out of place – I was initially responding to the 1st comment from AfricanBoy and ended up down thread!) 😉

      • Bitchy says:

        I don’t like the RF particularly. But I hope there will be a more decent end to that tradition than W and K.

    • Sixer says:

      AfricanBoy – you asked why we Britishers keep the BRF. Here, without all the utter nonsense about tourism, is why:

      1. Constitutional apathy/inertia – “Well, they don’t have any actual power to speak of so why go to all the effort of reforming a thousand-year-old unwritten constitution for no real benefit?”

      2. Public outright hatred of politicians – “What’s the only thing worse than having a royal family? Getting rid and having an extra layer of politicians It’s cutting off your nose to spite your face.”

      3. Residual effect of respect for nationbuilding and cohesion done during WW2. Particularly vis a vis ER.

      4. Effective way of exercising soft power without it being perceived to be politically motivated (even though it usually is).

      Points 1 and 2 remain remarkably constant. If anything, Point 2 is becoming more entrenched in public opinion. Point 3 is the only one currently reducing in attitudes. It’s a generational thing. Point 4 – this is where the behaviour of William is A Bad Thing. This manchild will not be able to perform this function on his current trajectory. Depending how bad he turns out to be, it could become more significant.

      • Lucinda says:

        QE2 hosts many state visits each year. She is in effect Head of State even if she is not Commander in Chief. Our President holds both roles (along with 5 others). Who would replace that diplomacy piece if the monarchy was removed? Would that go to the PM? I’m hoping LAK or Sixer would speak to this (or anyone else knowledgeable) . Thanks.

      • seesittellsit says:

        Well, was it Churchill who once said the monarchy was a wonderful system, If you lose a battle you fire the generals and if you win, you go to Buckingham Palace and cheer the King/Queen?

        I think there is something to be said for separating the Head of Government from the Head of State. And, where Britain is concerned, it isn’t as if there is not a huge historical connection – so much that happened to shape the country involved its monarchy and struggles for power thereof. I get historical continuity – but other monarchies, like Denmark’s, have the same thing (I think theirs is the oldest monarchy in Europe), but are a bit less ostentatiously paid.

        I don’t necessarily think there’s something wrong with having a monarchy, I think there’s something wrong with, e.g., the huge amount of wealth the Windsors built up through that obscene tax deal they got in the early 20th century and that lasted till Windsor burned and the public balked at paying for its restoration. I think only the Dutch and Lichtensteinian monarchies are richer than the Windsors.

        It’s not as if the Danish royals aren’t living well, but they are doing so in a country with an economy and social benefits that mean no one lives in abject poverty, and it’s not quite as in-your-face rich as the Windsors, who sit at the top of a pyramid with a lot of have-nots at the bottom.

        That’s how it looks to me.

      • Sixer says:

        Just to remind everyone: I’m a Britisher republican. I advocate getting rid of the BRF. My points above are THE reasons why we maintain a constitutional monarchy here, not MY reasons or opinion.

        Lucinda – see my point 4. As it stands, William will be the UK representative exercising the type of soft power exemplified by a state dinners or visits on behalf of the government. Can we even begin to imagine he is up to this? I think not. If we moved to a republic, this type of duty would, presumably, move the FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) and be undertaken by diplomats. As these affairs are already when not attended by royals.

        seesittellsit – I feel strongly that Head of State and Head of Government should be separate offices, as it is in many republics. The US is, as ever, an outlier on this. I’d favour an Irish system with a generally apolitical president rather than, say, a French system with a political president. And I’d certainly favour both over the US system. And I certainly agree that current BRF could be successfully downscaled in terms of cost with us continuing to maintain a constitutional monarchy, and that this would be better than nothing. If arguing against, however (as I’m not), it would reduce prestige and therefore the effectiveness of the soft power element.

      • Lucinda says:

        Sixer–I agree that at this point William is not up to the task and I’m not sure he ever will be. I think Charles would do a fine job. But I’m not a citizen there so it makes no difference what I think. Thanks for the response.

      • Sixer says:

        Lucinda – much as I am a republican, it is a really serious point you’ve brought out. We moan on here about Normal Bill being sulky and wasting cash and fluffing speeches and not reading his briefing notes and all the rest of it. But we also often say that he is nothing more than a celebrity. At present, he isn’t. But one day, although he will never wield any actual power of his own, he will be a vessel through which the British government wields soft power. There are real world consequences to his abrogating his duty.

        He really should step up or step out of the line of succession.

      • LAK says:

        Sixer: There are 2 work jobs he can’t get out of.

        1. Reading contents of his red boxes and signing documents so govt can get on with it’s business. Those boxes are delivered every single day except Christmas day.

        2. Weekly audience with the PM.

        William who can’t stick to anything, who can’t read briefing notes will be pushed off the throne if he holds up these 2 things because he will be holding up govt process.

      • Sixer says:

        Can you even imagine, LAK?

      • Megan says:

        @LAK and Sixer – No one in the US ever dreamed the president could skip the daily national security briefing, but Trump is defying all expectations. William is already showing total disdain for royal protocol and obligations, I doubt that will improve as he ages.

        Although I am not sure it entirely matters. At 90, the Queen is the only monarch the vast majority of people in the U.K. have ever known. She has built such a strong brand for herself, she can weather storms and scandals. Charles is nowhere nearly as beloved as the Queen and I doubt he will be able to stop himself from meddling in politics. I don’t think the role of the monarchy will be changed in Charles’lifetime out of respect to the Queen, but unless William gets a personality transplant, I cannot see things going forward as they have with him on the throne.

      • LAK says:

        Megan: i think you are right and i can see William figuring out a way to avoid the PM audiences and the privy council meetings, but that will set him up on a collision course with the establishment that upholds the edifice of monarchy.

        Throw in unsigned paperwork which ends up crippling the day-to-day workings of govt and he would be pushed out so fast his head would spin.

        This was one of the reasons David was pushed oling

        In an unintended way, he has already laid the groundwork for the perfect excuse for pushing him out. He wants to have a normal, private life. That desire is publicly enacted by his actions every year and by his interviews.

      • Bitchy says:

        @ Sixer
        4. Effective way of exercising soft power without it being perceived to be politically motivated (even though it usually is).

        Nobody knows what kind of power the RF wields and nobody knows what kind of politics the Queen supports. The Queen apparently put in no protest when Thatcher sold British companies. Queen didn’t protest when university fees were first introduced and later became astronomical.
        She didn’t say a word nor are any actions known when the laws regulating the financial markets were de-regulated and that one resulted predictably in that big financial crisis in 2009 when many people lost their jobs and many companies went broke. The Queen didn’t protest when the Tories ab-used the financial crisis to tax the poor even more and reduce the maximum tax rate on income which benefited the rich.

        Nobody can tell what kind of policies the Queen supports and nobody knows where she wields her influence. Even african dictators are more transparent.

        (Btw. the Queen still has secret bank accounts which aren’t subject to control by the federal tax office. Just saying.)

      • LAK says:

        Bitchy: This Queen has chosen NOT to exercise her soft power to benefit of the *internal aspects of the country, but when it comes to external aspects, particularly trade, there she is.

        Most recent example was chinese state visit came about after Cameron had agreed a trade deal with China. I’m sure that when you look closer at all the other state visits, a similar trade is going on behind the scenes.

        Ditto the ongoing love affair with the Middle Eastern royals who are currently buying or propping up various British institutions. The ongoing good relations with the BRF help those trades along.

      • Lightpurple says:

        I can’t see William being up to the task but if his father has the lifespan of his parents, William will be in his 50s or 60s by the time the position passes to him and I suspect he would have no problem taking an early retirement and passing it all onto the adult George.

      • Sixer says:

        Bitchy – you entirely misunderstand what I mean by soft power. It’s a diplomatic term for influence in international politics by other than military means. The Queen herself isn’t the one with the power when we talk of soft power. She is one type of vessel for the British government to deploy its soft power through, as Lucinda and I were talking about, state visits and dinners and the like. Diplomatic missions are another example of soft power. It’s not that the ambassador him or herself is all-powerful – the role is one through which government uses soft power in world dealings.

        You say nobody knows ER’s politics and that ER has not attempted to influence the domestic policy of the elected government. You’re right. That’s because it would be unconstitutional for her to do so and why the black spider memos by Charles were so controversial, despite the topics ending up to be relatively innocuous. Just because you (and I, with the examples you gave) disapprove of government policy doesn’t mean it would be fine for a constitutional monarch to influence it. That would be undemocratic.

        Either way, your comment has nothing whatsoever to do with my point 4, which was that the BRF is used by the British government as one aspect of its soft power activities. It is.

    • Vox says:

      I agree. I honestly quite like the tradition behind the monarchy as long as they have no real power and do tons of charity work but what’s the point if the royals are just going to be normal Bills? There is literally no reason to keep them if they lose all the royal protocol and traditions – especially the actual work that is the only possible justification for their extravagant lifestyle.

  2. Seraphina says:

    Kaiser spot on. How many signs must there be for people to realize that these two do not want any part of TRF except the money and entitlement that comes with it. I don’t see them turning down any perks but they turn their noses up and traditions and “work” which is expected of them. And I put work in quotes because let’s be honest, thesebtwo have not seen an honest week’s work.

    And I was reading comments somewhere on the web (I’m sick too Donny memory is fuzzy) where people are actually saying how wonderful these two are and a great example of the monarchy!!!! What juice are they drinking!!!!!

    Time to pull these two leeches off the public payroll. Maybe then they may swallow their entitled pride and do some work to earn their very plush exhistance.

    Ughhhhh. What. A. Waste.

    • jmo says:

      I’ve also read some comments, the DM people are torn lol

    • manda says:

      He needs to step down. They ARE royal, and that is their FAMILY. Charles needs to swat the side of William’s head

      • GemslieKnope says:

        If he’s so against his family, he needs to leave TRF and strike out on his own. It’s a disgrace that he takes all the perks and the money yet won’t take his role seriously. If he wants to be Normal Bill he (and Waity) can go and get jobs and be financially independent while raising their kids like we all have to. He’s incredibly ungrateful and she’s no better.

      • nikko says:

        I bet if the Queen decides to not make William 2nd in line and give it to Harry (can she do that?), I bet those middletons will have a change of heart and push William to get back in with the Queen and the traditions. @Gemslieknope, I totally agree w/ your last statement.

      • LAK says:

        Sadly Nikko, she has no say in her heirs. Only Parliament can change the line of succession.

        It’s not impossible. It’s been done 4 times since we became a constitutional monarchy.

      • nikko says:

        Thanks LAK!

    • Poppy says:

      I wonder if HM & Philip even care whether William & Kate are there or not! They will be surrounded by their children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, Princess Margaret’s children & their families. All these members of the family have shown them more love, respect & have supported the Monarchy over more years than the Cambridge’s ever have or will. This may be HM’s light bulb moment.

  3. Meow says:

    Tone-deaf, ungrateful, ill-mannered little prigs. TQ HAS to put her foot down and slice Bill out of th line of succession. They are flouting their position of responsibility and laughing in our (the taxpayers’) faces.

    • anna says:

      they are really unbelievable. i’m actually feeling sorry for the queen and not just bc poor thing is sick. she should have william step down asap. he is as useless as he is expensive and on a superficial note, both normal bill and katie bucket are nothing special to look at. i would forgive them a lot if they were to bring it with the sartorial splendor. but no. they procreated, rubbed their hands and basically retired.

      • Lucinda says:

        I’m guessing she would rather leave it to Charles since William is his son and she knows she doesn’t have many more years of ruling.

    • seesittellsit says:

      I wouldn’t hold my breath on William being exed out. There’s more danger in upending a system that rests on its authenticity than in having a less than stellar exemplar at the head for one generation. And it’s not as if they are wielding any real power. I cannot imagine Charles would disinherit his eldest UNLESS Wm. made it clear that that is what he wanted for himself and his kids. Wouldn’t disinheriting Wm. also disinherit George? I don’t think it’s that simple and I wouldn’t bet on Harry wanting any part of it, either. The BRF, I’m guessing, is not interested in another abdication-type upheaval. If Charles got away with his divorce, the adultery scandals, and later on being caught meddling in politics by writing to MPs on issues, which as I understand is strictly prohibited in his position, I don’t think Wm. is going anywhere on the basis of laziness and spurning a few royal traditions. Were I British, Charles getting away with attempts to influence government would have been far more upsetting than Wm. and Kate’s laziness.

      Wm. and Kate probably have some good reasons for not caring for Christmas at Sandringham (it sounds ghastly but they did go to the Queen’s Xmas lunch) but at this age the kids would have been fine with their nanny in their quarters. But they have been stupid about how often they do it and how badly they handle it – they really do seem like they are keeping the kids away from the grandparents and great-grandparents who, after all, will define their identities and roles later on. Another case of wanting to have their royal life cake and eat it, too.

    • Llamas says:

      Let them eat cake.

    • Lady D says:

      It seems to me they are deliberately trying to humiliate the Queen. They might as well of slapped her across the face. Why isn’t Charles sticking up for his mom?

    • marjiscott says:

      Agree with everything except Charles “Needing to swat Wills upside the head” . Poor 90 year Majesty is terribly ill, as is HRH Prince Phillip. 90 and 95 Somehow , I believe they all have tried in their apparently ineffective royal way to make William and Kate shape up. I guess it’s too late. If HM passes this will remind people of how uncaring he is. Someone needs to go in and throw them both out.

  4. Erinn says:

    So instead of letting the kids get used to the kind of life they’re going to be expected to live, W/K are using the kids as an excuse to shirk even more responsibility/engagements.

  5. jmo says:

    This is all about Kate. She doesn’t want to celebrate with the RF – for whatever reason – and whiney Wills does what Carole and Kate want.

    • Becky says:

      Is one day spent with family, albeit the BRF, going to do that much harm, seriously?

    • OhDear says:

      I actually think it’s about William, not Kate.

      As others have said, no matter who it is, it’s incredibly stupid. The kids need to be prepared for the royal life.

      • Another Kate says:

        Agree. I think Kate will do exactly whatever Williams wants. I’m also of the opinion that she follows his lead when it comes to workload.

      • Mamunia says:

        I also agree. Kate has molded herself into whatever William wants. His father has allowed him to do whatever he wants because of his guilt over how he treated his mother and the whole Camilla thing. The Queen has allowed William to do what he wants because she’s used to being passive with family matters. William ALWAYS gets what William wants. What he clearly doesn’t want is to be King. He has made this very clear.

  6. OSTONE says:

    The heir and the spare, 3rd and 4th in the line of succession to the British Throne, to be kept away from Royal Traditions lol. Man Jason didn’t think hard about that one. If they hate it that much, please step away forever. If only the whole shindig could go away when Lilibet passes.

    • GingerCrunch says:

      Absolutely!!!

    • minx says:

      Draw the curtain on the whole “royal” family and stop keeping them like pampered poodles.

    • Della says:

      He needs to be sacked – he is terrible, stupid to get a Yank who will never understand Royalty and the connection ( or not) the British feel to it to do this job – ‘experts’ ?? who gives a hot damn about child experts? this place is going to be a Republic as soon as Charlie goes unless he bucks up.

  7. Megan says:

    IIRC, Diana loathed Christmas at Sandringham. I would imagine her opinion greatly influenced William’s feelings about the Queen’s holiday traditions.

    • NatalieS says:

      Diana would have yanked him by the ear to Sandringham. She was always respectful of Elizabeth and the institution of the monarchy.

      It would have been amazing to see Diana take on Carole Middleton. I wonder if Charles misses Diana in times like these.

      • suze says:

        Diana would have buried the Middletons with a barrage of PR.

        I am quite certain Charles does miss her energy and focus during times like this.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If Diana had lived, we would never have heard of the Middletons. William would have been required by both his parents to live a much more rigorous, preparation-filled life. He wouldn’t have been at St Andrews, Club H at Highgrove wouldn’t have happened.

        She was determined to get him to the US into ivy league schools. I suspect Charles would have seen the value in his heir earning a higher degree from Berkeley or Georgetown like some other modern heirs.

      • Hazel says:

        William couldn’t have made it into Georgetown or Berkeley. He’s never been a scholar.
        As for skipping Sandringham for the sake of the kids–piffle. I bet the kids are swept away by the nannies for their own activities, leaving the adults to their ‘excruciating’ routines.

      • Seraphina says:

        Natalies: YES! Hhhhhmmmmm, how amazing would it have been to see Diana take on Carole. Wow. But I think Carole would be kissing Diana’s arse and not slapping her in the face as she is doing to Charles right now.

        Carole is her own worst enemy. Like all people, her downfall will be her over exhurtion of power and Wills will be able to thank her for his ultimate demise.

        She is the ultimate enabler.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Hazel, I’m not saying he would have gotten in on his own merit. But if the BRF wanted to send him to either of those institutions, he would have been welcomed. Just as Edward miraculously made it into university. It is doubtful Victoria made it into Yale on academic merit, but it was a good place for her to hide while dealing with anorexia. Even Ivy League will waive the rules for good PR.

      • Spiderpig says:

        Oh come on, Diana was a manipulative unstable nightmare who had to be “spoken to” by the police because she stalked men she had crushes on, sneaked journalists in to do TV interviews as part of her public war against her children’s father, and very nearly destroyed the RF. Perhaps people don’t remember or they’ve bought the revisionism since her death, but she did a hell of a lot more damage to the RF than the two workshy losers have.

      • Hazel says:

        Nota: true enough.

    • suze says:

      I don’t recall that Diana loathed it. She certainly showed up every year, cheerful and well dressed.

    • Montréalaise says:

      DIana may have loathed it, but she still went – unlike her eldest son, she had a sense of responsibility and duty.

  8. Swak says:

    Putting the children first would be to allow them to be, at some point, with both families. Don’t see why they could not have spent Christmas eve with his family as that is when they open gifts.

    • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

      That’s the thing they are not putting the children first. Children should know both families and it’s all about the Middletons. They r not even bothering to hide it any more.

      These stories r designed to get sympathy. Poor little us we’re being made to follow old and boring traditions while painting his family as old meanies. The RF have been nothing but patient with the lot do them since the wedding and it get thrown back in their faces every single time bit both of them and the Middletons. They refuse to see that they have lost the publication sympathy and r now getting our ire. I need to go sharpen my pitchfork.

    • LAK says:

      The way poor Jason writes these stories, you’d think that there are no other children at Sandrigham Christmas.

      • Kori says:

        That was my thought. There are plenty as seen in the Queen’s Vanity Fair cover. And william was close to Peter and Zara. He would’ve formed many of those bonds in his own Sandringham Christmas days.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Really. Structure is good for children, anyway.

      And how are they going to explain this when the kids are old enough to ask why they didn’t visit great-granny the Queen on Christmas? At some point the kids will start figuring things out.

      • Mamunia says:

        Great point. I was asked a very pointed question by a 10 year old nephew the last time I saw him, and was floored. Even though they rarely see our side of the family, he had it figured out.

    • Megan says:

      W+K have a huge house that can more than comfortably accommodate the Midds. They need to make Anmer the family base for Christmas so they can meet their obligations to both families.

      On an entirely separate note, I would give anything for one more Christmas with my grandparents. William may seriously regret this decision.

      • Lady D says:

        Anything. (‘cept my son.)

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        Ah, Megan, I understand completely. Both of my grandfathers died before I was born. My paternal grandmother – whom I am named after – died when I was six, so I have very few memories of her. My maternal grandmother – who only liked her sons and grandsons and had little time for her female descendants – had a massive stroke when I was five and was essentially a living shell for fifteen more years.

        What I would not give to have had more quality time with my grandparents. I know so little about them. No matter how structured and tiresome Christmas as Sandringham might be, to have the entire family together for a few days is something many of us will never experience.

      • misery chick says:

        Sadly, I think Wills is beyond feeling for ANYONE ELSE, except for himself; when he trashed his “beloved” mother for working too hard for charity and thereby neglecting him, that was IT for me.

      • Vox says:

        I doubt William will miss HM when she passes away, considering the pains he goes to to avoid her. He’s such an entitled prick.

  9. lightpurple says:

    Yet, won’t Zara’s kids, who are not in the line of succession, attending Christmas with the Queen?

    Sorry, but if my grandfather were 95 years old, unless he had committed some unspeakable crime, I would be there to spend Christmas with him and my kids would be there too. Because there just aren’t that many left for 95 year olds. Toddlers, especially toddlers those who have a grandfather who makes it to 95 and a grandmother who has made it to 90 and is still hale and hearty, whose own mother made it to 102, well, those kids have quite a few more Christmases left. And they have nannies who travel with them who can take the kids away when they get irritable.

    William is a giant, lazy, selfish prat.

    • Sixer says:

      And, may the saints preserve us, the idiot William is even PRESS BRIEFING against his own grandparents.

      • lightpurple says:

        What is wrong with him? Other than abuse or molestation, there is nothing that justifies this. My great aunt is about to turn 88 years old, she has had a rough year health-wise – I’m not even going to touch on her feelings toward our recent election – and her social calendar for the next week is booked solid because nieces, nephews, grand-nieces and grand-nephews, great grand nieces and great grand-nephews all want to spend some part of the holiday with her. Juggling it all for her is driving me bonkers. And she wants to see every movie that comes out this week, so they’ll all be seeing lots of movies.

        Who trained him to be so disrespectful and unappreciative of elders?

      • Ramona says:

        Speaking for myself, if I suspected that my paternal side had deployed their entire machine from men in grey suits to the media against my mother who is now deceased, I would be pretty cold towards them. I’m not saying thats whats happening here just that its a possibility.

      • Sixer says:

        He thinks being a wanker makes you normal, I suppose. Ho hum. At least he’s open enough about it that we can just see him coming and shout HOI! WANKER! HAVE A CRAP CHRISTMAS!

        It’s really quite amazing how he manages to dive below expectations every single time.

      • suze says:

        I am writing a press release decrying my mother’s dry Christmas morning omelets.

        They are bad for my family. The poor sausages need something far calmer and more normal.

        NOTE TO NORMAL BILL: Hey. Moron. Your grandmother is far more respected and beloved than you. Critizing her traditions is a dumb PR move. Hiding behind your kids is cowardly.

      • Emily says:

        @Ramona: I totally hear what you’re saying. But, at some point, he’s still being incredibly petulant and petty. If he truly thinks the BRF destroyed his mother’s life and led to her untimely death (and again, I wouldn’t necessarily blame him if he did), to the point that he can’t even stand to be with them on Christmas, then he can get a real job and get out. As his life stands now, though, he will shortly be inheriting these traditions as his own. His eldest is going to be a king, and as such doesn’t really stand a chance at a normal life, so what is the point of shielding them from royal traditions? As someone upthread said, the entire royal family is a tradition, and if William is set on being normal and not participating in traditions, how can he be king?

      • GingerCrunch says:

        Lightpurple, how about he never dealt with the traumatic death of his mother? God knows how the royals must have handled it and he was at a TOUGH age. Seems to me he is relishing in “fun mom” Carol’s adoration and being part of a more “normal” family.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Emily, yes! Even if he believed those things, he needs to man up and stop living off of them. Walk away and earn a living, Billy. But really, I don’t think he does believe any of it.

        He has started criticizing Diana for “working too much for charity” and ignoring him. This was an attempt to justify him not working for either EAAA or the BRF enough. He’ll even throw his late mother under the bus – he’s that selfish. The BRF is trying to make him work more, he’ll protest even more.

        He lives in the house where Camilla and Charles used to have their meet-ups, he is friends with the family that enabled that to happen. I don’t think overall he has a problem with infidelity and how it impacted either of his parents. Nor does he care what the royal machine may or may not have done to his mother, who was doing it right back at them.

        He just cares how it impacted him, so he’ll use any of it as an excuse to do what he wants.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        If he’s involved with mental health causes and openly encourages people to talk about their problems and conflicts with trained helpers…then maybe he needs to take some of his own advice because he is acting out his conflicts all over the place, in public, to the potential mortification of the entire institution.

      • lightpurple says:

        @GingerCrunch, the traumatic death of his mother was 19 years ago. He has had ample time and resources to seek help for any issue he has over it. His grandmother did not kill his mother and, while he was at Eton, he managed to have regular visits with her for tea. Sorry, but I see this “oh, he’s not over the death of …” excuse used all the time to cover up for all sorts of bad behavior for William, for Kanye, for others. Especially not after TWO DECADES. The rest of us don’t have that kind of luxury. We have to go on and return to our lives and our responsibilities, even if it means seeing one or two relatives we don’t like over the holidays. Again, his grandmother is 90 years old; his grandfather is 95. They don’t have that many Christmases left and three decades from now, George , who is old enough now to form memories, may regret that he didn’t get the chance to spend Christmas with his great grandparents and all the cousins on that side.

      • GingerCrunch says:

        Lightpurple, not offering it as an excuse for his lame a$$, just maybe an explanation. As someone further upthread said, he seems to hate his biological family and the fallout from his mother’s very public death could be a reason for it. I learned a LOT about psychological trauma recently and it’s incredible how far-reaching it can be if not dealt with properly (i.e. validation). Especially in childhood. 😕 And he very well COULD hold the queen responsible in his own mind.

    • Cee says:

      Zara’s children are and will be in the line of succession.
      Everyone else’s children manage just well. It’s always Charlotte and George who have to be extra managed… and that’s all down to their idle parents. The Royal great grandchildren are pictured as delicate whiel their cousins can not only get through Christmas with the Royals, but also enjoy it.

      • lightpurple says:

        But way, way down, right?

      • Cee says:

        Yes, but still in the Line of Succession. Harry’s children will also be “down” the line. Honestly, the moment William had a legitimate Heir, the game changed. Harry’s importance diminished because he is no longer the Spare. Anne, Andrew, Edward and their children/grandchildren were also moved down both in importance and place in line.

        But from what many insiders and people in the know have said, TQ leads two lives – the proper Royal one and then a private life where family dynamics are very different.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Currently Mia is 17-18th around there.

        Just as a reminder. W&K are outworked by both Duke and Duchess of Gloucester (he’s 24th in line) and the Duke of Kent (34th in line).

      • Kitty says:

        @Cee what’s ironic is that I bet you The Queen and Charles thinks Harry would make the better king.

      • lightpurple says:

        @Cee, yes, I knew about Harry’s order, and everyone else’s, changing the second George was born but for some reason, I mistakengly thought Anne had taken her kids out somehow.

        @notasugarhere, and the Duke of Gloucester is in his 70s and the Duke of Kent is over 80. But it is all too difficult for poor William.

      • Kori says:

        And the Duke of Kent has already had a ministroke. I wonder how much he, Alexandra and the Gloucesters feel they have to keep helping even at their ages and/or healths because the Cambridges won’t.

      • Flowers M says:

        @Cee

        “But from what many insiders and people in the know have said, TQ leads two lives – the proper Royal one and then a private life where family dynamics are very different. ”
        That’s really interesting. Can you explain it a little bit more, please?

      • Cee says:

        @Flowers – I’m sure LAK and NOTA know more about this, but apparently the order of precedence established for public life (who bows to whom, seating order… in short, RANK) is somewhat thrown out the window in private functions. It is said that it is Prince Philip who runs the show in private.
        So Zara could very well have more “rank” than her royal cousins, or Andrew gets more favouritism because he is TQ’s favourite child, etc. I can imagine Kate being relegated to the back seat, even though she is consort to the Heir’s Heir.

    • Dolphin7 says:

      +100000000!!! Sick of them hiding behind their kids as an excuse for their laziness. I really wonder which of the two of them
      is the real reason behind them blowing off the royal family.

    • Malificent says:

      We always make the 1000-mIle trip to my family for Christmas, but only go about half the time for Thanksgiving because it’s only a month earlier. This year, I felt like we really needed to go for Thanksgiving. Despite budget and time restraints, we flew out for four days. It’s only a 2-hour flight, but with ground transit, security lines, it’s an all-day trip.

      I’m so grateful that we did, as my beloved uncle, who was 88, passed away a week later. He was frail, but not on death’s doorstep at Thanksgiving , so it was a bit of a shock.

      Technically, he was a second cousin, but he and my father were raised almost like brothers. And he was a bachelor, so he was very much part of our immediate family — like a second father to me and a second grandpa to my son. If we had put our own convenience ahead of my instincts and waited just one more month to go home, we would never have had that one last holiday with my uncle.

  10. Karen says:

    They’re only the future heads of state and future heads of the church… According to this source, it’s obvious that spending one of the more religious holidays away from the actual head of the church will help them grow and prepare for their future roles. Possibly because they’re not confided to a schedule, and will get to wear sumo suits, they will become more normal and therfore understand the nuances and duty of church and crown.

    • suze says:

      “Get to wear sumo suits…”

      You made me shoot corn flakes through my nose.

      The fact that this is mentioned in every description of the normal calm happy Middleton Christmas is hysterical. To my American ears, it is a bizarre tradition, far weirder than the structured Sandringham drill.

    • Chaine says:

      I keep picturing kate in sumo suit…

    • Kitty says:

      They aren’t religious that’s why.

  11. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    Oh really. Then why do u keep running to Mummy for a normal middle class rip off royal family traditions done on the cheap then.

    The Middletons and Cambridges r really biting the hand that feeds with this story.

    They know they will get away with it because TQ doesn’t like confrontation but give the rent a shoot even they have to see their hypocrisy.

    Chuck won’t be so forgiving. They’ve overplayed their hand big time and it will bite them on the ass.

    They just don’t want the kids to see his family. Plain and simple.

    This is def about the Middleton Mafia not being allowed to stay at Amner and join the church pap stroll.

    • Cee says:

      Charles should give her a budget. She will be running to him with the kids in tow. William will not spend one pound of his own personal money on her.

    • Alix says:

      It still cracks me up to hear the Middletons described as middle-class. I should be so “middle class”!

    • notasugarhere says:

      That’s what I suspect too, Betti. It has been made clear that the extended Middleton clan are not welcome at Anmer, not welcome to pretend they are the BRF. That plus pressure for more work = this petulant response from W&K.

    • Lady D says:

      Technically the heir belongs to the crown, yes? Can Charles, once he is King, order William and Kate to present George 3 times a week for lessons on being a king? Will he have ways to be in George’s company if he wants? (’cause that’s what I’d do)
      Does Charles have to automatically hand over his duchy to William when Charles becomes King? Can he delay it to keep William from having access to all the money the duchy makes?

      • Kitty says:

        @Lady D, as far as I know, the Duchy is not Charles and only for the Prince of Wales so It will be William’s once Charles is King. Honestly, I think people are forgetting Charles has another son named Harry and once Harry has kids, I guarantee you that Charles will spend most of his time with Harry’s kids compared to William’s. I bet Charles will spoil Harry’s kids and his family.

  12. Mrs.Curious says:

    And how much does this the taxpayers (security) cost?

    • notasugarhere says:

      She took 8-9 RPOs with her just to attend a wedding in London solo. A former RPO estimated it cost minimum additional $20,000 a day for her plus one child to be at her parents house. Her, William, two heirs?

  13. Kaydee says:

    Charlotte reminds me of some character….can’t put my finger on it just yet. She does look like an old woman for some reason.

  14. Louise says:

    They will take the cash tho. No problems there!

    • Kitty says:

      Once they are Prince and Princess of Wales, they will wipe out all of the money from the Duchy of Cornwall.

  15. Alix says:

    I cannot for the life of me figure out why Kate waited soooo long to snag this job, only to refuse to perform it.

    • Meow says:

      She wanted the cash and the press – she thought she’d be sitting around in big poofy dresses and sparkly crowns all day.

      She is a very simple woman.

    • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

      She thought she colluded have the life of a celebrity. Stupid girl didn’t realise that celebs actually have to work to. She has no concept of work as she has never done any in her life.

    • PennyLane says:

      That’s the puzzling aspect – why try to get something for almost a decade (!) and then when you finally do get it, you act like it stinks?

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        It’s called a fantasy. I have friends like that. Who chase after something based on a fantasy in their heads. When they get it and realise the reality doesn’t match their fantasy they start complaining about it. She’s spoilt and has been raised in a bubble where she always gets what she wants. She doesn’t want to work so Carole and willy don’t make her. She is someone who has to be made to do something they don’t want to, hence the size of her clothes bill. She is bribed to do the meagre work she does.

      • crazydaisy says:

        Maybe all she wanted was William? Not the position, the power, the fame… Just him? Could she be that innocent? (Doubtful, just putting it out there.)

      • notasugarhere says:

        crazydaisy, do you honestly think she and her family would have put up with his behavior for 15 years if he was Billy the Plumber?

  16. CharlieWaffles says:

    Motherhood/fatherhood has changed Kate and Willis – but not for good. It’s like Kate realized that life isn’t a Disney movie after George’s birth. She always looks miserable, bored, emaciated, uninterested,…

  17. zappy says:

    That statement sound ridiculous. Are you sure WK have PR team?..
    They are royals. Funded by taxpayers. Period. Nothing could change that..
    They really try hard to be not associate with RF but at the same time, they take all the perks for being royals..
    I do really think that WK think they are irreplaceable as heir, so he have the power to do anything they want or say anything..
    Kinda funny if someday, someone kicked them out haha

  18. Ramona says:

    I guessed as much. I wouldnt want to spend my Christmas with that stiff bunch much less want to do that to my kids. I bet its just lots of backbiting, policing each others decorum, passive aggressive digs to each others faces and dressing up for dinner. I cant imagine this is a fun loving occassion in which relatives play charades and you can change into your fat pants without judgement. Attack me if you like but I am glad William would disard this Downton Abbey crap in favor of warm family relationships for his kids.

    • Wren33 says:

      I agree. People here seem to embrace and defend the rest of the royal family as a way to further put down Will and Kate, but it does seem horribly dysfunctional. Having grown up with normal Christmases, I can’t imagine taking a fun Christmas away from my young children. However, they can’t have it both ways. If they really wanted to break away, then they need to take themselves out of the line of succession.

      • Nic919 says:

        George and Charlotte would be able to hang out with their cousins of the same age, which kids normally find to be fun, whereas they won’t have anyone else their age at Middleton Manor.

      • IMO says:

        @Nic: I don’t think George and Charlotte often see the other RF kids…

      • Dolphin7 says:

        Couldn’t agree more Wren!!! They have been trying to have it both ways. Charles and Diana’s marriage was a mess, and I think that messed William up pretty badly. But it seemed that Charles got a lot more involved after she died and he and the boys got closer. Something is going on with William and Kate, this whole Middleton normal Christmas is so strange, complete with the sumo wrestling outfit and faux Sandringham shoot. And they keep throwing out how it’s the last Christmas before Pippa gets married too, like the guy she’s marrying will be too poor to have a car to drive back and forth between their house and Buckleberry.

      • suze says:

        No one is taking anything away from them. If they have Christmas at Anmer, they show up at Sandringham for a few hours, do the church walk (which is what the would do with the Middletons anyway), then the go home to a house full of Kates relatives and sumo costumes and fun.

        A house, by the way, financed by the dull Windsors.

      • suze says:

        I was outraged on behalf of the royal family, particularly the Queen and Prince Philip, until I was reminded that this was Pips last Christmas as a single woman.

        I wouldn’t want the children to miss the stripper Santa and Carole’s fabulous jello shots.

      • Olenna says:

        Jello shots, LOL! No Christmas snow for the Midds. They’ll be making it rain!

    • OTHER RENEE says:

      +1

    • PHAKSI says:

      Like Wren33 said, if his family is that awful he should cut all ties with them completely, including financial ties. He cant have it both ways. Spending a few das with dysfunctional people in exchange for ridiculous wealth seems like an easy choice to me

    • COSquared says:

      That’s a myth. Many Windsors, including TQ’s GD Zara just a few weeks ago, have stated how much they’ve enjoyed Christmases in Norfolk and how they always look forward to it. This “cold Windsors” storyline was another of Diana PR strategies.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        Yes and one William and the Middletons have continued to push since they got married. Carole is setting herself up as head of a shadow court.

    • Montréalaise says:

      I hope you wouldn’t be saying that if “that’s still bunch” were funding your very privileged, very luxurious lifestyle. There’s a word for people who take, take, take from others but rarely or never reciprocate.

    • hmmm says:

      Don’t forget the gag gifts, @Ramona. It’s all just so terrible and oppressive.

  19. JustME says:

    IMO, William married the wrong sister. I believe Pippa would be a better duchess than Bland.

    • OhDear says:

      Pippa’s not a doormat, though. William wanted someone who would put up with his [doodoo].

    • Tourmaline says:

      Yeah no way would Pippa and William be compatible. She’s too sparky and lacks the petulent reticence of her sister.

  20. Beatrice says:

    I read this puff piece, apologist nonsense in the DM this morning and almost gagged. A pathetic attempt to use the kids as an excuse for avoiding Royal tradition. I cannot believe that Jason/Will/Kate thinks this flimsy rationale for ducking out on Christmas with the Queen is believable. It’s never too early to expose the heir and spare to the traditions of the BRF and laughable that little kids would have to adhere to rigid constraints. Social climber and momager Carol is clearly pulling the strings for the Cambridges to their detriment. Will needs to step out of the line of succession or step up to his royal duties! He is not a Middleton–he’s a Windsor!

  21. Karli says:

    It’s no wonder you can read more and more Rexit-comments. There’s nothing royal about the new generation. It’s like paying the rent for unemployed celebrities.

  22. Betsy says:

    Oh, come on. This is just dumb. Isn’t the complaint that the kids are kept too far away from everything by tradition, in their nurseries? They’re not expected to dress for dinner or go shooting. They’re probably made to show up to a meal or two, the end.

    And as someone rather smartly pointed out above, if these traditions suck so badly, why are W and K remaking their holiday to resemble that of the Royals’?

    Is he gunning to leave the line, or does he really just think he have the Twitter version?

    • word to the wise says:

      I believe that children are separated from the adults during meals. I think you have to be 11 or 12 to be included…..could see William and Kate making an issue out of it. And family game night is apparently dictated by the queen. No one can stop playing games until she goes to bed. Which can often be midnight. The horror!

  23. cindyp says:

    They are just awful. I can’t believe that “Poor Jason” thought this statement would endear them to the public. Most of us feel obligated to visit family over the holidays that we’d like to avoid. That’s what decent people do, especially if they’re elderly & pay the bills. This really makes me angry & I’m not a Brit!

    • Harla Jodet says:

      “Poor Jason” truly is tone-deaf to the public at large but this excuse will keep all the W&K fans happy. Speaking of “Poor Jason” I’m truly surprised he’s stayed as long as he has, I would have out of there in a heartbeat.

  24. Harla Jodet says:

    I don’t see anything wrong with teaching children, even young children, that sometimes one must do something they don’t particularly want to do because it gives joy to another. Sometimes buttercups just need to suck it up.

    • Chrissy says:

      I agree, Exposing them to both sides of the family can only broaden their horizons. what’s so wrong with being on your best behavior once in a while in front of the great grandparents. I bet they would have a ball partying with livewire Mia Tindall and just imagine the presents and huge tree. Will and Kate using their children for their PR is shameful. So over them and their antics . Grow up already!

    • word to the wise says:

      Yes to this. You make a very solid point.

  25. Emily says:

    The press always makes the Royal Christmas sound so ominous! Sure there’s a schedule, but I can’t imagine it’s *that* bad…

  26. PHAKSI says:

    I don’t know why Will and Kate’s tone deafness and complete lack of self awareness still surprises me. I really thought he would change his mind cos of HM and DOE being ill.Christmas with HM is probably no fun and planned with military precision. Those kinds of traditions are what make the royal family “different” and “special”. If George and Char are not gonna be taught those traditions and are gonna grow up middle class then they might as well go ahead and change their name to Middleton.

  27. Pedro45 says:

    Charles must be so angry. It looks terrible for his whole streamlining the monarchy thing if his heirs refuse Christmas traditions, not to mention refusing work.

    I think the monarchy is stupid, wasteful and outdated but if Christmas is too big a burden for Will then how could he be King?

    • Sarah says:

      He doesn’t even want to be king. In almost every interview he moans about burdens etc.

      • Pedro45 says:

        But he doesn’t want a regular life without an absurd amount of privilege either. He can’t have it both ways.

      • Sarah says:

        William likes his life – except the royal duties. He can’t have it both ways, you’re right but that’s what he wants. He’ll be a horrible king.

      • Harla Jodet says:

        Pedro45, I think William wants the life he sees his aristo friends having, however he doesn’t see the work they do to maintain their country piles and lifestyle.

      • Beatrice says:

        He takes after his great uncle David (Edward VIII) who relished the lifestyle but not the work of a monarch. Wallis Simpson gave him the right “out”.

    • Kitty says:

      That;s why I think he will turn to Harry(wouldn’t be shocked if he has now) and his future spouse when he is King. Heck I wouldn’t be shocked if The Queen has done so as well.

  28. TeamAwesome says:

    I think this is Normal Bill telling everyone that Gran and Pops don’t know how to monarch. When he is King, he’ll show everyone how it should be done, because he knows better about all things. Like PR, obv.

    Ugh. Meanwhile, everyone has that side of the family that you don’t want to spend a lot of time with because they’re weird, or too strict, or Republicans, or whatever, but you suck it up at the holidays because that’s just what you do. Compound that with she’s not only your Gran, she’s your Boss you petulant little twits.

    • graymatters says:

      Maybe he figured out that he’s the side of the family that no one wants to hang out with and he doesn’t want to face it. Hence, the pseudo-royal Middleton Xmas with the fawning side of the family and their new cash cow.

  29. Looty says:

    Sorry, I’m with Waity and Wills on this one. You have to decide what’s right for your family. I had relatives who started pulling the “we’re old and won’t be around forever” argument at age sixty. Anyone who seriously tries to pressure a young family about Christmas plans (as opposed to just letting them know they’re welcome) is the selfish one.

    • NatalieS says:

      Are your lives entirely financed by those elderly relatives? It’s incredibly disrespectful to spend the entire year with your hand out and then moan and complain when you’re asked anything in return.

    • Jade says:

      Looty, normally I agree elders shouldn’t pressure younger ones with obligation. But from birth to marriage and fatherhood and even until now actually, who has been funding, sheltering and educating William and family? If he wants to be independent, he can volunteer to get off the line. He has been accorded flexibility like marrying his choice, changing his major, working part time instead of being a full time royal etc. Instead of growing up and accepting duty and showing an example to his children, he keeps licking his wounds. Isn’t it funny that their PR almost always consists of some reasoning to avoid duty or it’s about not setting up expectations or not following royal traditions (but hunting and dressing their kids in vintage clothing and pursing titles for the in laws are okay). Who does that?

      It would be entirely different (to me at least) if Will and Kate demonstrated a strong work ethic and enthusiasm for work, even if they do not want to spend time with the royals. At least this would have shown respect for the taxpayers. But they don’t even do that.

    • suze says:

      I agree that it’s far better for young children to experience sumo costumery and rented shoots, rather than waking up in their own beds at their own house on Christmas morning.

    • lightpurple says:

      But his relatives are not 60. His grandfather is 95 years old.

    • Della says:

      I presume you arnt British and if you are you don’t understand what Royalty is about – Royals don’t get to decide to raise their kids OUTSIDE Royal tradition, its Royal Tradition that props the whole house of cards up, there is nothing selfish about that – its THEIR JOB in exchange for being treated with a huge amount of deference and a pile of money and power, that British people like me could do without having to contribute to.

      Get a grip….

    • hmmm says:

      How do you know there was pressure? You just bought into poor Jason’s lies that Christmas with the royal fam is merely about duty.

    • LaMaitresse says:

      Sure, for commoners, not Royals. And not two petulant ,spoiled, pathetically stupid, flippant cretins we have seen since ghastly Wallis and Edward!

  30. Kaz says:

    Does anyone else think that there could be something amiss with Pa Middleton? He has kept a very low profile recently….just wondering if he could be ill? That might explain the defection to Middlesville for Christmas…..

    • Olenna says:

      I don’t think there’s anything wrong with him. He’s Carole’s loyal partner in crime but has always kept a lower profile. I don’t believe the divorce rumors either.

    • suze says:

      I hope not. Sincerely.

  31. rory says:

    Just read that the Queen and her husband are on their way to Sandringham by helicopter.

  32. NatalieS says:

    How do they not feel mortified using their small children as excuses to get out of things? Their kids are going to grow up and see through what William and the Middletons did and the cycle will repeat itself.

  33. TyrantDestroyed says:

    I cherish the last Christmas I got to spend with my elder grand-father when I was a kid. Recently my husband lost two grand parents and we will never forget the last chance we got to spend it with them.

    To me William and Kate are a pair of narcissist and self indulged persons. Most of the people cannot tolerate their antics anymore and they should be removed from the line of succession if the monarchy must continue.

  34. Indira says:

    I don’t want to be irreverent but I don’t think Philip has many more years left…

    • Kori says:

      I think that’s just being honest. He’s 95–another year and a half and he’ll be the longest lived of Queen Victoria’s male descendants and closing in on Alice Athlone’s record period. It’s only common sense that he’s on limited time.

  35. Who ARE these people? says:

    Since when did fancy dress mean sumo wrestler costumes?

    • suze says:

      I know! For all the complaining about the dull, onerous pageantry of a royal Christmas, it still sounds less burdensome than putting on a sumo suit.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        And less … “let’s make fun of a time-honoured Japanese sport.”

        #pippatips “When throwing Christmas parties, laughing imperially at other cultures’ silly customs is a great way to make merry whilst honouring the birth of Our Lord”

    • Odette says:

      The UK term “fancy dress” is the equivalent to a U.S. “costume party”.

  36. The Original Mia says:

    Ridiculous! I have 1 grandparent left and there is no question I’ll be spending part of the day with her. No question. Not only is it a sign of respect, but love. I love that little 95 yo woman.

    I feel sorry for G&C who won’t be able to interact with their other cousins. Those children will have so few memories of Elizabeth and Phillip as it is. Spending Christmas Eve with Charles and the rest of the royal family won’t wash the Middleton out of them.

  37. Millenial says:

    I no longer feel bad for Poor Jason, the man needs to be fired. He’s doing a terrible job.

    In any event, if they want to skip Christmas Eve and Boxing Day, that’s fine. But skipping Church on Christmas? In that family? When you are the future Head of the Church or England? Yeesh. In my family, you could get away with a lot as long as your butt was still in a pew on Holy Days.

    • Della says:

      exactly they CofE head honchos should be running his arse over hot coals, the head of the Church, not going to Church on the Churches main Holy day??

      lol his days are numbered.

    • Kitty says:

      Looks like William is a hypocrite. He is supposed to be the future head of the Church but won’t go to Church on CHRISTMAS DAY!!! Are William and Kate even religious?

      • Maria says:

        I believe the Middletons attend church at Xmas. So I guess the Cambridges will too. All for show of course, since they don’t attend the rest of the year.

      • Kitty says:

        @Maria, as a believer I find it weird that WK aren’t as religious as The Queen. W one day will be head of the church.

      • Maria says:

        Kitty, I don’t find it that surprising that they are not religious. I don’t think that Charles and Diana were exactly dragging them to church on Sundays. And when you think of the reason why the Church of England was established, it was so that Henry Vlll could divorce Catherine of Aragon. People objected, like Thomas Moore, and were beheaded. I don’t think Henry was even thinking about Christianity when he took that step. I think the Queen is religious and so was Princess Margaret, but it didn’t make its way down to the younger generations.

      • Kitty says:

        @Megan, Oh I know about the history of the Church of England and I do not like its teachings anyways, but I do think the reason why The Queen has been reigning for so long is her strong faith in God. Was Diana a Christian?
        Basically William and Kate live for the world and not for God.

      • Maria says:

        Kitty,
        I know one of the reasons the Queen won’t abdicate is that she made an oath to God to serve for the rest of her life.
        Diana wasn’t religious but I think she was spiritual but she didn’t attend church on a regular basis. And she toyed with the idea of converting to Islam when she was with Isnat Khan.
        Kate and William don’t even live for the world, they live for themselves. But that is not atypical for this generation.

  38. notasugarhere says:

    So many excuses, so little time. #poorjason #jasonweseeyou

  39. Nikki says:

    Can’t believe I was EVER a Kate apologist, though I blame William the most. This is the MOST disgraceful thing they’ve done, and how STUPID are they to publicly ignore the popular queen?! Ungrateful, dumb leeches.

    • TheOtherOne says:

      I agree. Will probably thought he sounded intelligent by using psychological reasoning but instead he sounds even more like an idiot. Jason needs to be fired and Will & KatieKat need to be cut off.

  40. I swear Charlotte looks just like Queen Elizabeth and her sister when they were little. Same face.

  41. kcat says:

    Why does everyone assume William and Kate are wanted at the Royal Christmas? So what they are expected to be there but who wants to hang out with a bunch people who don’t want to be around you? Maybe when the Cambridges start to give a little push back everyone is like so what?

    Something happened with Charles and William and William is still mad about it. I think this whole thing boils down to them two.

    • Odette says:

      I’ve thought about this too. The “royals” may be like, “[high five] The least favorite members of our family decided to go to their other in-laws this year! Wooot! So much better without them around.”

      • kcat says:

        Right! I would be thrilled if I didn’t have to see my sister in law, the other Royals may feel exactly like this.

  42. Jools says:

    These excuses are ridiculous! Children love routine! What Will and Kate are actually doing is ripping G&C out of their Anmer routine (5 min from Sandringham) and bringing them to Middleton towers (hours away).

    And, um, a ROYAL child needs to be exposed to ROYAL tradition. If you’re gonna take the cash from the state-owned Ducky of Cornwall cause you’re ROYAL then you darn well better act like it.

  43. TheOtherOne says:

    Ungrateful idiots. I wish I could spend one more Christmas with my granny who passed two years ago. Will’s arrogance is becoming more apparent everyday and I will personally enjoy watching it come back around to kick him in the butt. #KingHarry

    • Indiana Joanna says:

      KM just gets more evil looking as she ages. She has assumed W’s vindictiveness and hostility towards her inlaws and his over the top self entitlement. You can see it in her face.

      Carole is behind all the press leaks and has thrown in quotes from a supposed child expert to validate her power move. Did they also lift and insert the expert’s quotes to give Carole credibility? It’s unbelievable that Carole is waging this public war in the press against the Queen and Charles.

      W, enjoy your tat-filled, sumo wrestling-costumed, animal-shoot-in-a-pen Christmas. I can’t think of anything more pathetic.

      • LaMaitresse says:

        I agree 100% with everything you have written, I have always loathed Waity and Ma Mid, two ghastly jumped up common women. The Cambridge’s behaviour is beyond the pale, you cannot break protocol as a Royal, and Carole has been far too intrusive from day one in this marriage. Those children would be fine at Sandringham for Xmas, Christ you think it was Aleppo they were going to instead of a lovely country house with family!

  44. Tough Cookie says:

    Willy is probably mad because Granny doesn’t let him sit at the grown-ups table.

  45. ToredDancer says:

    Everyday. Constant negatively.

  46. Nico says:

    In the most extreme circumstance, I can see this going bad for William and Kate because if the public thinks the BRF is this cold then they’ll end it early and it’ll backfire for William and Kate. They’ll garner such pity that the public will think they’re doing them a favor by dismantling the monarchy so he can go live his normal life when that’s not what William and Kate wanted in the first place. The petty side of me wants that to happen so bad so that they can eat their own words. ‘You wanted to be normal so here you go.’ Lol If they wanted to be royal and do nothing, they were born in the wrong generation then. They would do just fine before 1900.

    • Kori says:

      From Victoria’s reign on, the BRF have worked ceaselessly on charities etc. William would’ve done fine in the Hanoverian reigns or even better in he preWW2 imperial monarchies which didn’t realize the importance of public approval.

  47. JaneDoesWork says:

    But their lives WON’T BE simple or “normal.” Children will identify “normal” as the environment that you create for them. Will and Kate are basically setting up Charlotte and George to be resentful and contrary to the roles and responsibilities that they have been born into. Its like they are intentionally setting their children up for failure, its incredibly selfish.

    If you resent the job that much, just abdicate. Don’t do a piss poor half ass attempt at it, its not fair to your country.

  48. Maria says:

    All that nonsense about putting the children first. The children are too young to care, and besides, they would have playmates at Sandringham. It’s about putting William and Kate first. It’s always all about them. And these colds with the Queen and the Duke should be a wake-up call for W&K that they won’t be be around forever. Shame on them!

    • Harla Jodet says:

      Hi Maria, I’ve read that Mia (Zara’s daughter) was really looking forward to playing with her cousins at Christmas, who are they going to play with at Middleton Manor?

      • Maria says:

        No one. All the adults will be fawning over them. Luckily, little Mia will have her Phillips cousins, Savannah and her sister to play with.
        I hope K&W don’t start letting the kids decide what they want to do at Xmas. George will be king one day, and this is heritage, whether he likes it or not, and that’s what they should be teaching him.

      • graymatters says:

        Mia’s cousins Savannah and Isla Phillips will be there. They live on the same estate so they know each other well. We’ve seen photos of Louise and James Wessex playing with S and I, so Mia will probably be welcomed warmly by them as well.

      • suze says:

        I think the fawning is a good point.

        At the royal Christmas, all four are members of the firm, with expectations and responsibilities.

        At theiddletons, they are coddled guests, who are adored and served.

  49. LO says:

    I understand that Christmas celebrations used to happen at Windsor, but after the fire they moved them to Sandringham. Was there a traditional Christmas walk at Windsor or did that start after things got moved to Sandringham?

  50. notasugarhere says:

    Showing how royal PR can be done, new holiday video out from the Swedish royals. Victoria, Daniel, Estelle and Oscar out for a tromp in the woods. Adorable.

    On YouTube, search for
    En julhälsning från Kronprinsessfamiljen

  51. perez says:

    I enjoy stories about the royals as much as anyone – but honestly – who cares about what side of the family they chose to spend time with on Dec 24th and 25th? Everyone has choices about what to do and family options to chose from. I ponder what it would be like to have international news stories saying “Perez chose to go skiing with friends over Thanksgiving and will miss the traditional family dinner this year.” Royal or not – Christmas is personal. For young families it’s a way to launch a new set of traditions and ways of being a family unit that build a foundation for the decades to come. They are figuring it out. Give them that.

    • Pedro45 says:

      This is is not personal though; it’s literally what William was bred for.

    • suze says:

      When they decide to live as Bill and Cathy Middleton, they can do just that.

      While they are accepting the perks of lives as Windsors, expectations are different.

    • Rachel says:

      The news literally reported last night and today on the Queen’s movements to Sandringham. It was maybe the 5th item on the news – ‘Queen delays journey to Sandringham for festive period’. They beam the Queen into every living room to deliver her annual speech. So no, if you’re in the BRF then your Christmas is only partly personal. That’s the price you pay for being royal.

      And as other have pointed out – William and Kate were given Anmer Hall so that they could be close enough to Sandringham to partake in the main royal celebrations AND forge their own family traditions with the children and/or the Middletons.

      • notasugarhere says:

        W&K were rumored to be house hunting for a private residence in 2012, which would have been a PR and security nightmare. They’d already rejected a Duchy estate (Harewood) that Charles spent years fixing up. Other choices were smaller, more public houses at Windsor that are part of the Crown Estate. Anmer solved that problem.

        I don’t think HM ever intended to have Anmer become Middleton Central for months on end. She never intended to have them all move onto her private property and play act like they were members of the BRF. That may be part of why these W&K are so petulant this year – because the Middletons are not welcome at Sandringham (Anmer) for extended periods.

      • misery chick says:

        OK, I’m confused…didn’t I read upthread that the extended Mid fam wasn’t allowed at Anmer after last year? Even if that’s true, still think W & K are absolutely horrible!

      • Kitty says:

        @Nota do you think The Queen and Charles prefer Harry over William?

      • suze says:

        But surely the Midds could visit for Christmas, even if the plan wasn’t to have them move in (which is ABSURD. They have a perfectly good estate only 3 hours away)

      • word to the wise says:

        Nor should they be welcome for extended periods. it would make things quite awkward for the queen to have the Middleton’s staying five minutes away and not inviting them to the Christmas Festivities. The reality is that she cannot invite all of the in-laws from her children’s and grand children’s families. They simply do not have the room. That is the reason that she keeps it exclusively Royal during Christmas. The fact that the Middleton’s think that they should always be included when the rest of the family knows that Christmas is the Queen’s day is incredibly selfish and bullheaded. Nasty pieces of work.

  52. Kitty says:

    Honestly I think its more clear now than ever William does not want to be King or even Prince of Wales. I don’t think he or George will ever be King and I have a good feeling it will be Harry who will be King in the future.

  53. hmmm says:

    Well, well, Jason, the ever mendacious apologist and spinmeister for the Dolittles once again justifies their hateful decisions by throwing major shade on the RF Christmas, describing it as a “DUTY”. He is reprehensible and the Dolittles have really cranked up the vitriol in trashing anything to do with the BRF, even longstanding family traditions. They are vile and contemptible and very defensive.

    Let’s forget that this is the one day that granny would like them all there. One. Freaking. Day. William is definitely out for blood.

  54. Cerys says:

    There is no reason for this other than petulance. The Lamebridges live on the Sandringham estate. They could join the royals on Christmas Eve, go home so G&C can open their presents from Santa in the morning then go back over for lunch. There are clearly some tensions around at the moment probably due to Whiny’s lack of work and enthusiasm for the job. I hope he shapes up or ships out soon.

  55. Ruyana says:

    In the top picture baby girl looks so much like Queen Elizabeth.

    • Kaydee says:

      Not really. She looks like Carole Middleton. I see it now. The queen was/is far prettier than Carole ever was.

  56. Bre says:

    Do you think Will and Kate will send their children off to boarding school? If I remember correctly, Will was sent at 9 and Diana was really against it. I have always found boarding school strange, basically a way to have someone else raise your children.

    • LAK says:

      Diana was never against boarding school. She ( and Charles) sent both boys to boarding school at 8yrs old.

      Diana PR played such a fantastic role as mother to public gallery that people glossed over the fact that her kids were in boarding school.

      • notasugarhere says:

        This is why I always side-eye the “William was damaged by being Diana’s confidant 24/7/365” stories. Diana was known to lie, she could easily have lied about that too. Both W&H were away at boarding school during the majority of the War of the Waleses.

    • Lacia Can says:

      One thing no one denied about Diana was that she adored her children. I could see her being protective of them. Do you get that feeling from Kate? I don’t. The Middletons are very hung up on aping the upper class and I believe the tradition amongst the upper class is to send the kids to boarding school. G & C will likely be shipped off. Just my opinion, of course. I’ll likely be proven wrong. 😀

      Btw, I’m not saying Kate doesn’t love her kids. I just don’t get the mama bear vibe from her like I did with Diana. She will likely do whatever Bill tells her to do.

      • Lady D says:

        You don’t think she will ever put her children before her husband? I’m not sure what I think about it, you see such little interaction between her and her children. It seems they are more an accessory to their parents.
        As far as boarding school goes, I’d fight it tooth and nail. I didn’t want someone else, or a bunch of someone elses responsible for my boy’s upbringing. Depend on strangers to instill a sense of right and wrong, teach him responsibility and manners and respect, the importance of an education? No, this is my job and not one I would trust to strangers.

    • LaMaitresse says:

      Public school is expected and perfectly normal in England, usually as a border for the better schools. Isn’t it normal is the US and Canada too from Grade 9 onwards? I was shipped off and so was my brother, and it’s AWESOME!!! No one raises you, or teaches you manners, your parents do still, and the schools are wonderful academically, socially, and you make friends for life. Why do people find it odd?

      • word to the wise says:

        No. it isn’t normal in the US to go to boarding school. It’s mostly reserved for the very wealthy traditionalists.

      • LaMaitresse says:

        Maybe it was more of an 80’s thing, and further my father was asked to set up transplant units in the gulf, training other MD’s. We had family issues, my mother had substance abuse problems, and he felt if he had a safe environment for his children and a dry environment for his wife, all might be well. My brother was a raging delinquent and I had an eating disorder, very classic, and school really helped us. Poor Mum didn’t fair so well, but did get better in the long run. Many people in Canada, not just super wealthy did send their kids to boarding schools in the 80’s, not sure now.

  57. Joannie says:

    That little girl is adorable! My favourite Christmases were as a young child….lots of chaos. I can understand why they want to avoid the stuffiness. You’re only a young child for a very short period of time.

    • Word to the wise says:

      I don’t think she’s at all adorable. She’s homely.

      • Natalie S says:

        Adorable to you must mean looks, huh?

        She”s not even two years old. Maybe you should think about what makes you objectify a toddler.

      • Joannie says:

        Merry Christmas to you both!

      • suze says:

        Can we leave the kids out of this? Plus, children change so much, almost daily, that you have no idea what she’ll look like next week.

      • Word to the wise says:

        Ha. What are you talking about? I can find a child that is born to an attractive mother and formerly more attractive father to be homely in comparison because she doesn’t look like them. She resembles her horribly behaved grandmother. You’re reaching with the “objectified toddler” nonsense. We naturally respond to the way we see human’s external visage.

      • word to the wise says:

        Fair enough suze. Fair enough.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Natalie S, and what about those who objectify this toddler with fawning opinions about her presumed physical attractiveness? Who are the people who feel the need to fawn over a stranger’s child and insist she the most physically adorable child on the planet?

        If the opinion of the lack of physical attractiveness of a child is to be left out of discussions, the opinion of the same child’s physical attractiveness should also be off the table.

        Discussions of whom the child looks like can be had without assigning opinions about attractiveness or lack thereof of the child’s “looks”.

      • Anitas says:

        @notasugarhere
        Seriously, this is just a child, a perfectly nice little girl. Cute and less cute toddlers get fawned over all over the world, it’s how a lot of people react to kids. Fair enough if fawning irritates you (or not necessarily you but the people you’re talking about) but to counter it with ‘she’s homely’ and ‘she’s plain looking’ is simply mean and says a lot about the person who speaks it. ‘If you have nothing nice to say, better not say anything at all’ should totally apply in this case. Sadly some people can’t contain themselves.

      • word to the wise says:

        Anitas-
        How do we know if this is a perfectly nice little girl? Are you her nanny? We know that Prince George has been proven to be very rough with other children and animals, as well having long, screaming-down-the-house temper tantrums. Countless other children all over the world behave in this fashion. PG happens to be the son of an heir so he gets more attention. He is also very photogenic little boy. Princess Charlotte is not as photogenic in my opinion, nor does she resemble the queen. I am allowed to state my opinion. This does not make a nursery school “teaching moment” necessary.

  58. sage says:

    Billy hated his childhood, IMO. He will not allow his children to relive it.

  59. Bread and Circuses says:

    Gosh, I still think Charlotte looks so much like her gran. 🙂

    I see so much of the queen in her face, particularly around the eyes.

    • Word to the wise says:

      That’s insulting to the queen. She looks like Carol Middleton. Those are her eyes and mouth.

      And the queen is her great-grandmother. Not her “gran”.

      • LaMaitresse says:

        I agree, both the Queen and Princess Margaret were beautiful little girls and young women, this child is rather plain. She does look like her grandmother, nothing like the Royal side of the family, or Kate really.

      • Word to the wise says:

        Yes!
        I was trying to think of a nice way to put what I was thinking about her and “rather plain” is just perfect.

  60. Zeddy says:

    Man alive do I ever hate this couple. I like the BRF because they represent stability; that not matter how awful things can be, at the core of society is something present and unwaivering, hardworking and always chugging along. They drive me mental.

  61. Spiderpig says:

    I suspect there is something more going on here. A lot in the British press about a serious security alert against the RF, and this being the real reason the Queen’s trip was delayed and for the helicopter. Is there is a terror threat specifically naming Sandringham?

    • suze says:

      Well, *if* that is the case then the rest of the family shouldn’t be descending on it as we type.

  62. paddyjr says:

    I apologize for the length of the following rant. This article really was, for me, the breaking point.

    Oh, Willy and the Midds want to play, hmmm? M’kay, let’s play. But, before you put your foot further in your mouth, Willnot, you may want to read up on your history. So go ask Grannie Liz how abdication worked out for Wallis and David: living off their celebrity social-climbing friends and handouts from Bertie. And they didn’t have kids. Do you really think you and Cannot can support your brood on the inheritance from Mummy (you know, the one your alternately sanctify and demonize), Uncle Gary and whatever crumbs your father/brother decides to give you? Because make no mistake: Chuck is the product of both Phil and Liz, both of whom have spent the majority of their lives ensuring the monarchy is protected. And how charitable do you think King Harry would be after you’ve trashed Diana as a “bad mother”?

    Or, you can talk to Grandpa Philip about his family being banished from Greece by the time he was toddler, leading to a nomadic existence of being shuttled from relative to relative during school breaks since Daddy ran off to Monte Carlo, Mummy’s in a asylum and the sisters are all married to German princes (so you know, they won’t be at Philip’s wedding), Just for funsies, also ask him about having to give DNA to prove that all of the bodies of his murdered Romanov relatives were present and accounted for.

    In other words, Willy, put up or shut up. You may have been born “destined to be king”, but you have a choice. Likewise, the people (your “subjects”) can choose whether to continue financing your hard-luck-woe-is-me lifestyle or deciding “nah, we’re good.” (see Greece, Spain during the 2nd Republic, France, Italy, etc.). The BRF is the living embodiment of British tradition and history. They are representatives of the UK at home and abroad. For this, you get millions of pounds a year. But, if you don’t want your kids exposed to the BRF Christmas traditions, maybe the people will decide the Royal Family is a tradition best left to the history books.

  63. Starlight says:

    They will soon go running back to Sandrngham next year when they watch the other royals leaving the sandringham church n Christmas Day from the middls living room on their wide tv screen, While Nicholas Whitchell BBC royal correspondence rubs it in how they aren’t in attendance and actually how they aren’t missed. I do wonder if Wills would have been happier giving his position to Harry as he wriggles and endeavours to leave all the duty to him anyway.

    • Maria says:

      Well, in order for the throne to pass to Harry, William either has to die or he had to abdicate. If he knows anything about Granny’s uncle’s abdication in 1936, he will know that the Royals made life very difficult. He was pretty well forced into living in exile, wasn’t invited to his niece’s wedding or her coronation, wasn’t really given a job.I don’t think Willy and Waity want to give all the perks up and end up like that. On another note, they have been under a lot of criticism for choosing the Middletons for Xmas, so maybe they feel somewhat guilty. We can hope anyway.

      • Kitty says:

        @Maria times have changed. I do wonder though if it gets to that point if William and Harry made a switch by an act of parliament. Harry and his heirs are now first in line while William and his heirs are in Harry’s place as of today.

  64. Rocio says:

    As I’ve stated before I think monarchy is long overdue. I don’t follow the British Royal Family Reality Show that much but IMO Will and Kate are jealous of Harry and his fiancée and this is a way to show their discomfort since the formers are getting a lot of attention and people are starting to consider them future King and Queen. IMO, again, I think Charles will be king and live as much as his mother and by the time he’s done, monarchy will be abolished. Who knows?!

  65. A says:

    This is so terribly insulting to literally everyone in the RF. Like, literally everyone, from the Queen to everyone else in her family. I would have believed the garbage about Christmas at Sandringham being stifling and bent in tradition at the time of Diana’s marriage into the family, because I do think there was a lot of credibility in the reports that stated there was a degree of culture clash between Diana and the RF. But the thing is that the RF has had time to learn from that, and I honestly do not think that the Queen or anyone else at this point would be so slavishly beholden to tradition that they would enforce it so strictly on everyone who’s attending. Times have changed. The RF has changed with them, probably, and at the end of the day, the Queen has a family whom she loves very much. A family that has had a great many people who have married into it, with a number of grandchildren and great-grandchildren who likely bring a lot of their own ideas and perspectives. And I’m sorry, but I absolutely do not buy the idea that the Queen is THAT unaccommodating and tone-deaf to the needs of her family. No way. If that were the case, you’d have seen a lot more people jettisoning from the ship at this point . And yet, folks like Charles and Camilla, Princess Anne, and every one of the others are still there.

    Willy has no excuse. This is entirely him throwing a tantrum for god knows what reason. If he had an ounce of introspection or care for his emotional health and that of the children, he’d know how useless it is to continue to be petulant and belligerent. It doesn’t help him, it doesn’t help his children, and it doesn’t help anybody else. He’s entirely projecting his own insecurities and feelings about having to spend Christmas at Sandringham on his immediate family, and that’s sincerely alarming for everyone involved, especially his kids. They deserve a better upbringing that strives to balance their duties with their lives, not one that associates every last one bit of their future with the anger and misery that their father seems to regard it with.

    At any rate, what’s most aggravating about all of this is that the Middletons would get much further if they actually just backed off. Not even the families of the aristocrats who married into the RF have been known to have as much influence as these folks do. They’d earn more respect and a better name for themselves if they just left well enough alone, but they don’t, and it’s for that reason that people will always regard them with utter suspicion and contempt.

  66. vava says:

    Well, if I were the Queen, I’d give William a kick in the arse. That would be the end of it. Put up, or get out. That’s it. I’ve always thought Queen Elizabeth II has been weak when it came to dealing with her LAME family members.

  67. Ravine says:

    What is the evidence that Jason Knauf is talking to the DM through “parenting expert Lisa Clegg”?

    She’s just a random, self-promoting quote-peddler the DM staffer contacted to pad a speculative article. It’s the parenting equivalent of the ubiquitous “Dr. So-and-So, who does not treat Jennifer Lopez…” from the US rags. I’m sure she’s a nice person, but in terms of being an authority on the BRF, my sense is that she could be described by a Philomena Cunk caption: “crowd member,” “televised mouth user,” “sentiment analyst”…

    I’m not even saying she’s wrong! Just that you can’t infer the truth from her words. At best, they coincide. Yes, Will does often use his kids as a “shield from criticism” (great turn of phrase), but the reason *Lisa Clegg* says they’re doing it for the kids is that she’s a so-called parenting expert. That’s her angle. The DM contacted her to *get* that angle. If she was a dysfunctional family expert, she would likely say they were avoiding the RF because of dysfunctional family issues. She doesn’t have any special insight into the specifics of this situation.

    The other person quoted here is “Jo Wiltshire, a parenting expert for Childcare.co.uk”. I rest my case. And by the way, the DM and other tabloids do this all the time. It’s the illusion of content.

    So, before everyone goes “Oh man, another example of William using his kids as an excuse! POOR JASON!”, maybe think about other meaningless, un-journalistic articles you’ve scanned on the subway and how seriously you took them… and consider if this piece of fluff is any different just because it happens to be about a topic you’re interested in. Or because it supports your preferred narrative about that topic.

    • Emily C. says:

      THIS.

      Also, remember that it’s the Daily Fail. The truth, to them, is whatever sells papers and pushes their politics. That’s absolutely it.

      I looked up Lisa Clegg. “Parenting expert”? Yeah, not so much. She’s got a monetized blog and a free parenting e-book. Not only that, but her blog is particularly bad even for a monetized mommy blog. Every post is a not-so-disguised advertisement.

  68. Bee says:

    Eventually they’ll do a referendum on keeping or ditching the BRF. Once all the old timey’s who would vote to keep it have gone on to a better place, the result will be a resounding “goodbye Wills, don’t let the door hit ya on the way out”. It will be BRFEXIT, not BREXIT.

  69. a says:

    I just don’t get this insistence by Will and Kate to raise their kids ‘normally’. The whole reason for royalty is that extraordinary sacrifices and sense of duty is expected of them. So, the kinds might as well learn early. They are not entertainers or ribbon cutters, but have an important constitutional and public role. I wonder if they’ve ever really thought about the true meaning of their role.

    • Maria says:

      Exactly. And quit using the word normal. It doesn’t apply in this case. There is nothing normal about the way he lives, or his children for that matter.

  70. crazydaisy says:

    Maybe there was a terror threat? Its possible.

    Generally, though, I feel so disappointed in William, the Prince. Watching him walk behind Diana’s coffin was heartbreakingly moving—we all loved him and little Harry so much then. Which is to say, both those kids were in a position to become great men, to rally the public and do really great work in the world— for peace, for the environment, for human rights. Instead, they seem to be predominantly self-centered, and weak.

    Such a shame….but i guess that’s just who they are. Spoilt, rich, celebs. My ‘noble world leaders’ fantasy was only a projection…

  71. WendyNerd says:

    Making this even worse? Zara’s miscarriage.

    Like, WOW, guys. WOW.

  72. Zardi123 says:

    Well the idle Lamebridges have won the award for the rudest abd bad manners and atrocious timekeeping on eengagements. … This pair are idle beyond belief and we public ought to give them what they want to be normal…. So let’s vote them out and let them find their own jobs and work for a living and not spend 174,000 pounds on clothes in a year for Waity on playing dressy up she has no manners and does not deserve the priviliged lifestyle they currently are having they dont want the traditions of BRF and their spoilt children to know about the Royal way of life then let them go and live with the meddlesome family of hers