Does Queen Elizabeth really deserve credit for modernizing the monarchy?

Centenary celebrations of the Royal Air Force

This current issue of People Magazine is just People’s in-house promotion of their documentary special, The Story of the Royals, which airs on ABC on August 22 and 23rd. I’m not expecting the documentary to break any news, especially since People’s cover story seems to be so friggin’ lame and obvious. The House of Windsor is not in bad shape – Prince Harry and Prince William are pretty popular, and their wives are very popular too. The Cambridge children will grow up in front of the cameras and people will love that. Meghan will get pregnant and people will love that storyline too. That’s all this is, and all it’s ever been: a soap opera. A publicly funded soap opera. Let’s not kid ourselves.

Like all soap operas, there are storylines and “brands” and a “cast of characters.” What’s interesting now is who is getting credit for what. According to People, the Queen should get a lot of credit for “modernizing” and “allowing” William to marry the sainted peasant Kate of the Bucklebury Middletons. And Saint Kate’s entrance led the way for Meghan to marry Harry. So, basically, Queen Liz and Saint Kate are responsible for everything we see now.

There have been times of crisis when the House of Windsor creaked and almost crumbled. The tragic death of Princess Diana 21 years ago this month brought questions about how close the royals were to the feelings of the people they serve. And the gossip-laden ending of the marriages of Prince Charles and Diana and Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson, coinciding with the fire at Windsor Castle (all in 1992), made it feel more soap opera than stately. But, after steadying the ship by agreeing to some modernizing changes, and, more significantly, permitting Diana’s sons Prince William and Prince Harry to marry Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle, respectively (commoners whom they simply fell in love with), Queen Elizabeth has strengthened the institution she has led for 66 years.

“She’s insuring the future of the monarchy by being open and flexible and adapting,” former palace staffer Colleen Harris says in this week’s issue of PEOPLE. “She’s allowing it to rebrand.” She notes how some people around the palace were “quite shocked” that William was marrying “an ordinary middle-class girl with no background in royalty or aristocracy,” when he wed Princess Kate in 2011. “People then sort of thought, an ordinary person can grow up and marry into the royal family. How exciting, how different! With [Meghan], that takes it even a step further.”

Harris, who was on Charles’ press team from 1998 until 2003 and was the first black member of the royal household, adds, “The Queen is allowing the royal family to modernize. We have come a real long way. They are not stuffy and immovable.”

It was Kate, for example, who was the prime mover behind the royals’ successful adoption of a strategy to tackle mental health challenges. Lorraine Heggessey, CEO of the Royal Foundation, which runs the charitable endeavors of the younger royals, says that the 36-year-old mom of three is “thoughtful, strategic and equally committed to bringing about change. And she often spots the nub of the issue or a critical thing that needs dealing with.”

[From People]

Saint Kate: Nub Spotter. No, scratch that. Saint Kate: Keen To Spot Nubs. I’m sorry, I can’t even type because I’m laughing at my own dumb joke. NUB SPOTTER. Who knew that Kate really was working this whole time? She was nub-spotting for YEARS. Literally, years.

As for the rest of it… yeah, I love 20th century royal history as much as the next person, so I know that it’s not like the Queen was some brilliant branding expert this whole time. A great deal of the credit for the royal family’s late-’90s rebrand should go to Tony Blair, who saw that the Queen’s bad instincts were going to destroy the institution completely. And it sort of pisses me off to see Charles’ erasure from this narrative too – Charles is far from perfect, but he has much better PR instincts than his mother as well, and he’s good at being patient and playing things out over the course of years.

As for “people were so surprised that William deigned to marry a peasant lass, a lowly nub-spotter of yore” stuff… literally no one was surprised that William married someone who was not an aristocrat or from any kind of “old family.” Kate had waity’d for a decade and people had gotten used to the idea that she was going to get the ring. The only surprise was that Kate seemed to be William’s ONLY option.

Kate Middleton leaving her house

Royal week in Scotland

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announce their engagement

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid, Avalon Red.

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

93 Responses to “Does Queen Elizabeth really deserve credit for modernizing the monarchy?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Digital Unicorn says:

    It was TQ grandfather that started this whole ‘modern’ BRF drive and made it what it is today – TQ just carried on with his traditions.

    I agree that TQ has bad PR instincts, Chuck is better at playing the game even more so that his ‘PR genius’ eldest son. It will be interesting to see what he does with the institution when he finally becomes King.

    And I wish the media would stop with the ‘Kate’s a major mover and shaker behind the scenes’ because she ain’t – Cambridge/Middleton PR we see you.

    • Nic919 says:

      If she even made the suggestion, it was to create less work by putting everything under one large charity to create less work. But since the royal foundation of prince William and prince harry actually existed for years before he even married Kate, it’s a smoke and mirrors to make it looks like she does something more than shop.

      • nonnon says:

        So william said it on camera. Harry said it on camera. And now ceo of their foundation said this. But they are all wrong because you know better. You know her. You know what she is doing behind the scenes. LMAO

      • Nic919 says:

        What has she done behind the scenes? Please list something since you seem so invested in her. At most she came up with the name. They literally did not name anything else that she has done. And what’s happening right now while she is in mat leave? Is it falling apart because she isn’t there to guide it?

      • nonnon says:

        @nic919 I have no idea what she is doing behind the scenes. I don’t know her. I am not there. I am basing it on what william, harry, other people who work with her and now their ceo of their foundation have said. Difference between you and me is that i am basing it on people who know her and knows what she is doing behind the scenes. And you are basing it on what you think based on your narrative of her. And what are you talking about with falling apart because she is on maternity leave. If a director of a company for example is going on maternity leave that company also won’t fall apart because the director is on maternity leave. LOL. And nobody said she is guiding it. And what you said about that i am invested in her (i am not it’s just a hobby for me) Are you really saying that. LOL You are also in every article about her…… just saying

      • Becks1 says:

        Also, look at what the CEO is actually saying. HT as a general thing was Kate’s idea, and then she can spot a critical issue. She’s not saying “Kate is involved, I meet with her constantly, she’s really hands-on, she’s very keen to take the lead here.” She says that she is thoughtful and committed to bringing about change. That’s not the same thing at all.

      • Natalie S says:

        @nonon, what have they said specifically? Is it solely that she proposed the topic and coined the name? What else have they said?

        The thing with royalty is that there is an eye-rolling amount of exaggeration when it comes to describing their behavior and contributions. The way I heard it put years ago was, “What is described as basic good manners for a normal person is beautiful, perfect manners for a royal.” You have to allow for inflation.

        There’s also the matter that they all lie. They’ve all been caught at it. So a bit of observation to see if action bears out what they’re saying is also needed.

    • Becks1 says:

      I kind of love the whole “mover and shaker” storyline for Kate though bc its so predictable. She’s really working hard guys! Even when you cant see her! She’s working hard!

      I can believe that Kate may have helped convince William to take on “mental health” as their main cause, but I don’t buy the rest of it.

      • nonnon says:

        It isn’t new. They have said this two years ago. William did on camera. Harry did on camera and now ceo of their foundation said this. You don’t believe it because you don’t want to. You have your narrative for her and this isn’t it for her according to you. Could it be that william, harry and now their ceo of their foundation know her and what she is doing behind the scenes and you don’t so what they are saying is the truth and what you have been saying is wrong. Just saying.

      • Nic919 says:

        What is she doing behind the scenes? You can’t actually name anything. And if your logic is correct, nothing is happening right now because she is on mat leave. I guess people with mental issues are going to have to wait until she decides to “work” again before they get any further help.

      • nonnon says:

        @nic919 Just like i said upthread. I have no idea what she is doing. I am basing it on what william, harry, other people who work with her and now their ceo of their foundation have said. You are basing it on your narrative of her, so what you think and not what you know. And what are you talking about…..”her maternity leave and nothing happening and people have to wait with issues”. Who says this. What has her maternity leave have to do with this. Nothing.

      • Lizabeth says:

        Well, if the “News” section on the Royal Foundation webpage is reliable not much has been happening “in front of the scenes” so I hope something is happening “behind the scenes.” There were 9 news blurbs listed for this calendar year so far. One was for the joint interview of W,K,H&M in February. Another one of the nine stories, posted in May, was just a rehash of that interview. What’s different is that a separate film cut from the Feb interview is presented for each of the 4 royals. Interestingly, this news blurb was published the day after H&M’s wedding AND Meghan’s blurb comes first in the story. The last news blurb was posted May 24, 12 weeks ago. It reported the prenatal to infancy mental health task force Kate called for (initially reported in the March story) had met for the first time and is chaired by Scott Greenhalgh.

    • Betsy says:

      Yes, this. I give Harry credit for working behind the scenes because he’s now fifth or sixth in line for the throne; I don’t “expect” the same level of handbag engagement from him or Meghan (though I love that they were doing it before they went on summer hiatus).

      From William and Kate I expect visibility. A few times a week. I mean, sure, let her finish her maternity leave, but then she should be out there with William. Who should also be out there.

      • Muffy says:

        To William’s credit, since their move to London he has been out a few times a week. Seems like he has taken over a lot of investiture ceremonies from TQ. He was in France this week for a memorial service.

      • Nic919 says:

        He was off for several weeks in Mustique while Charles and Camilla were out doing events. He has upped it slightly from his past but he is nowhere near what he should be for the second in line to the throne. Anne, Andrew and Edward still have higher numbers than him this year so far.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yup. William has been doing better but he was doing so poorly before that anything seems better. Same with Kate. We all praised her extensively for her appearances earlier this year but that is what she SHOULD be doing. She should be making regular appearances a few times a week – so many that we cant keep track. In my mind, if we can still track her appearances, she isn’t doing enough.

  2. JanetDR says:

    All I can say is that I am totally down for the Queen in that ceremonial outfit which doesn’t look too modern!

  3. Sarah says:

    It’s beyond offensive that there is still have a monarchy in 2018. How can people even accept that, just because the royals do 4 events/month.

    • Tina says:

      Eh, I’d rather have a monarchy than a Trump.

    • Mara says:

      Yes it’s a question of what’s the alternative? A Prime Minister on their own would have too much power and status.
      A neutral silent monarch allows you to voice dissent without being accused on being anti patriotic. Three of the most important words in British democracy are ‘Her Majesty’s Opposition’ – giving legitimacy to the opposition.
      That said I wouldn’t be opposed to the Indian system of a President and a Prime Minister. My mum always said we should keep constitutional monarchy but choose the monarch by random from the population and treat it like jury duty – so far this is my favourite idea – imagine how fair politicians would have to be if literally anyone could be come Queen/King.

    • Mac says:

      Why is it offensive that the British choose to continue a tradition that has existed for nearly 1,000 years and is deeply woven into their culture and identity? Sure, the BRF should support themselves and pay more taxes, but to suggest the monarchy is offensive misses a few critical facts.

    • Huh says:

      How much tourism $$ does the royal family bring into London?

  4. Kaiser says:

    I’m sad that no one is saying anything about my brilliantly stupid nub-spotting jokes

    • JanetDR says:

      Sorry because that was funny!

      • Mac says:

        I first read it as “nob spotter” and thought, well obviously, she is married to the world’s biggest nob.

    • dumbledork says:

      I liked it! Although when I hear the word “nub”, it makes me think of Chandler’s nubbin on that Friends episode.
      Nubbin = third nipple

      • antipodean says:

        Oh Kaiser, please don’t be sad. Your incomparable levity is always appreciated, albeit quietly, in these sad, dark times. Kate, “the nub spotter”, she will henceforth be. Thank you for all your hard work, and the smiles you engender every day!

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Awww, it was funny but nub-spotting had me thinking to those photo’s of ‘Big Willy’ taking a pee in front of paps when he was drunk – she really did have to ‘nub spot’ there. LOL

    • Becks1 says:

      I don’t even know what it means to spot the nub as a non-joke. Like, what is that person trying to say?

      so because of that I did appreciate your jokes Kaiser lol.

    • Anners says:

      Can I also mention that you chose a *brilliant* picture of Kate – she looks like she’s smugly thinking “that’s right…I’m not a lazy layabout filling in time until my reluctant prince puts a ring on it….I’m a NUB-SPOTTER! Take THAT, quibblers and pettifoggers!”

    • C-Shell says:

      The jokes were EXCELLENT, but closely rivaled with that old photo of the Nub Spotter in Chief. I blew coffee (with CREAM!) out my nose.

    • Dr Mrs The Monarch says:

      If Kate is so great at nub spotting how does she keep letting Will go out in public in those pants?

  5. aaa says:

    I am here for Kate’s Grinch face. I have not seen it lately, I wonder if she’s gotten Grinch Face suppression lesson.

  6. Nic919 says:

    Sophie was a commoner and came from a family that had less money than Kate. Sarah was a commoner too. There was really nothing special about the Queen granting consent to let Kate in the family. The only story she gave them was the waitying which no other woman had bothered to do for that long.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      It wasn’t so much the Waitying but the fact that she was the only one who wanted to marry him even after he kept cheating and generally treating her and her family like crap for years.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah I liked that point from Kaiser – Kate was the only one? Maybe because they got together relatively young, and I know William cheated on her and then you have Jecca Craig, but it certainly never seemed like he had his pick of eligible artistocratic females.

      • nonnon says:

        Where is your evidence of cheating….. pictures, video or something…… you don’t have it. You think that he was cheating because of a couple of tabloid stories alluding to it but that’s no evidence of cheating. (and stop with that jecca story line that haters came up with). That’s really irritating. He didn’t have to marry her. She wasn’t his only choice. If you really believe that LOL. They are together for fifteen years with three children and you are still going on about gossip from 12 years ago. Let it go.

      • Lady D says:

        Daily Mail archives. All kinds of pictures and video of William performing with young ladies other than Kate. Do some homework. The ‘couple of tabloids’ line was cute. Every gossip mag in existence has pictures of him with other women. As for the Jecca story, he’s the one that abandoned his daughter at her first Easter to attend Jecca’s wedding, less than 18 months ago, not 12 years ago. Clearly, Jecca is important to him. Nobody needs to push the Jecca line, he is doing fine at that all by himself.

      • Becks1 says:

        And didn’t he miss Peter’s wedding for the wedding of Jecca’s brother? The first time Kate met the queen, he wasn’t there because of Jecca?

        But sure lol. Its a storyline that we “Kate haters” keep pushing.

      • aaa says:

        There have been pictures of William as recently as the 2017 ski trip looking chummy with other women but there are not pervasive reports of William being a big cheat either as a husband or a boyfriend. The most damning pictures were in 2007 but he and Kate briefly broke up in 2007 so it’s not clear that they were a couple when those photos were taken.

        My conclusion is that when William drinks he gets friendly, flirty and will even get in others personal space but I see no indication that he is a philanderer.

      • Lizabeth says:

        You could be right @AAA Will hasn’t cheated on Kate if we define cheating as having all-out sex with another person when in a relationship. That doesn’t jibe with things I read online in the past that seem to have disappeared but ok. And leaving out the whole question of emotional infidelity, a kind of “cheating” that many people find more hurtful than physical infidelity, I’m not quite ready to say that touching other women’s bodies when drunk is simply being “friendly” or is harmless “flirting” (although an awful lot of men do make that argument!)

      • notasugarhere says:

        The public going after other women while Kate was in the room. The stories for years from people in their set about his wandering eye, her nasty behavior towards any other women near William. Some of those in on-camera interviews around the time of the engagement. Even Harry was known to refer to her as The Limpet for her ability to cling when not wanted.

        Yes, he puts Jecca and her family above Kate and their own little family. KM was too sick to work but was magically ok to fly all the way to NYC to join him on a work trip. A trip that happened to include him attending an event for-and-with Jecca. Him claiming he cannot work more (working parents are evil idea), but had no problem missing their daughter’s first Easter to go to Jecca’s wedding.

      • aaa says:

        @Lizabeth, I don’t think that William was all that emotionally invested with the women he me in clubs or ski chalets, so emotional infidelity is a non-issue.

        If there were reports about William cheating that disappeared from the internet I am inclined to believe that those reports were likely on fly-by-night gossip blogs or random musings.

        I would not want to be the wife or girlfriend of a flirty drunk but I think that it is a gross distortion to characterize Will and Kate’s relationship as one where he cheats on her and she puts up with his cheating based on a a couple of pictures of an inebriated William being chummy with other women.

        Re Jecca, to me it is much more noteworthy that William opted to go to Jecca’s brother wedding when his wedding conflicted with the wedding of a cousin that he is supposedly close to than him going to Jecca’s wedding.

      • Lizabeth says:

        Well, when pictures and stories disappear from the internet and the BRF is involved @AAA, I’m not sure it means they were fake. At any rate, I’m pretty sure I saw a photo of Will in a London bar grabbing onto Tess somebody when they weren’t broken up. And wasn’t he pretty “active” while in the military? And during a breakup with Kate he sure seemed to pursue Isabella C. In fact, didn’t IC dump him? Then he went back to Kate?

        I agree Will likely isn’t invested in the random women he touches these days when drunk. I still find that behavior kind of repulsive but you may be right it doesn’t bother Kate.

        I can see now it wasn’t clear the way I wrote but when I mentioned emotional infidelity I was referring primarily to Isabella and Jecca. He has shown Jecca, in particular, remains very important to him. Not going to Peter’s wedding likely hurt his cousin’s feelings but I would bet Kate was more bothered by his absence at Charlotte’s first Easter. I doubt she was terribly happy about the all-male- except-for-Jecca hunting trip in 2013 either. I can’t know how Kate felt but I know how I’d feel. I may be projecting my own feelings but it seems to me that Diana was bothered by Charles’s emotional involvement and long history with Camilla as much or perhaps even more than his sexual involvement. I’m not saying Jecca is William’s Camilla. But given how hurt Will was by his parents’ marital issues and given that Diana shared lots of details (inappropriately) with Will, it’s a little odd to see his willingness to do some of the same things. And living in Amner Hall? I’m pretty sure he could have asked TQ for a different property given the circumstances.

  7. minx says:

    No, she doesn’t.

  8. Sarah says:

    Modernizing the monachy is an oxymoron for the ages.

  9. Nickles says:

    You can’t modernize an institution that is as archaic as a monarchy.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I agree that the queen is bad at PR. I think she’s getting better at it (taking Meghan on the train with her was a good PR move), but overall she’s not very good at it. Agree that Charles is better, and I think Harry is better too when he’s not pissed at the press and is more willing to play the game. William isn’t but thinks he’s some sort of master at it. Kate may be a commoner but I don’t see what she is doing to modernize the royal family, besides insist on Christmas with her family once or twice.

    • Cerys says:

      Exactly. The queen is still stuck firmly in the past, which is understandable for a lady of her age. The only times she has changed anything is when the Royal family’s popularity has been waning.
      Charles would likely have instigated changes if he had come to throne before now but he is going to be elderly himself if he ever becomes king. Any changes are likely to come from those hard-working, movers and shakers, the Dolittles. Lol

  11. perplexed says:

    I think she listens. That’s an important trait. So, yeah, I’d say she deserves credit.

    Leaders are given a ton of advice. And then they have to pick out the best of what is given. It seems she’s done that to ensure the survival of the monarchy during her reign in a modern age when people don’t really need a monarchy.

    Someone like Donald Trump never listens and also hires really bad advisors (like his daughter and son-in-law). And, er, look at what’s happening now….

    So the fact that Queen Elizabeth has been smart enough to listen to the right people makes me think she has been effective, and, thus, deserves credit. Institutions as large as these do rely on advice, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong that she has to go to other people to make the thing function properly (whatever that means in the case of a monarchy) or not destroy it. Has she always been perfect in her decision-making? No. But, given the length of time she has reigned, she could have easily destroyed the institution if she had felt the urge to listen only to herself (as we are now seeing in the case of Donald Trump).. I also think she does genuinely love her country and wants to serve it in duty (whatever the heck that means in the case of monarchy, but I’m sure it’s been explained to her.) I also think she has carried herself off with a certain dignity most people would find difficult to sustain over 66 years (think abut it — she does have the gravitas to make you believe she is THE QUEEN, even though it’s dumb in theory that she even holds this job in the first place).

  12. Rainbow says:

    The only way to modernize a monarchy is to abolish it.

  13. Betsy says:

    Can someone please tell me what that insane and amazing getup is that TQ is wearing with the tricorn and the feather? I feel like I should ‘LW what event that’s for, but I want that.

  14. Seraphina says:

    The Queen, if she did have a part in modernizing, I think she was forced into it and as a matter of survival. It was not due to WANTING to modernize. Which means she has no instinct about moving forward.

    And yes, modernizing the monarchy is a wonderful oxymoron.

  15. Tina says:

    The Windsor Castle fire was, ironically enough, the turning point, because after that the Queen and Prince Charles started to pay tax. I agree that Tony Blair should get some of the credit, but John Major should get most of it. He was instrumental in dealing with the Charles-Diana divorce and the difficult 90s period.

    • Ennie says:

      +1, seraphina and tina

    • minx says:

      Yes. I think Charles and Diana’s divorce was a relief, not just for them, but because it acknowledged that times change and people divorce, and it’s ridiculous to make them suffer in a bad marriage. Diana’s shocking death and the TQ’s tv appearance that week also nudged things along.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Margaret and Tony, Anne and Mark, Andrew and Fergie had all already divorced by that point.

  16. nonnon says:

    Kate was not dating william for a decade. They got engaged after seven years together. First two years were at uni. So five years after uni. They got together when they were 21 years old. That’s not waiting. That’s a normal relationship. If you really believe kate was william’s only option LMAO. Please stop with that stupid narrative.

    And yes kate was behind their heads together campaign. William and Harry have said this a couple of times now on camera in interviews. And now their ceo of their foundation said this about kate. Could it be that people who actually work with her know her and what she is doing behind the scenes unlike you.

    • Harla says:

      Hi Carole!

    • Red Snapper says:

      You know those contests where people put their hands on a car, and the last person standing wins the car? That’s Kate. He broke up with her repeatedly. He cheated on her. He did his best to attract other women, they weren’t interested. Only Kate. You can believe in the fairy tale if you want, but as has been stated many times, if William ever meets someone he loves and/or respects more, Kate’s history.

    • Nic919 says:

      All they have ever said is that she suggested to group the charities under one main charity. And it’s actually a horrible idea because while it creates less work for the royals, it means the individual charities have to fight for their own funding from the general fund, that goes first to the royal foundation and then it gets divided up to the various ones with no explanation as to how much each one gets and how it’s decided. So many of the less popular charities may end up not getting what they need because they are hidden under the umbrella of the vaguely defined royal foundation. Not like Kate would actually know any of this though. She hasn’t attended a royal foundation meeting in months if not years. The CC lists who attends them if you want documented evidence.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is a horrible idea. Much of fundraising depends on personal engagement with strategic funders. You need to build relationships with them one-on-one and get them to be With You for years. By having the royal staff running around pressing donors to give money to the royal umbrella instead of the individual organizations, they’re making it worse.

    • nonnon says:

      @Harla I am not Carole. So everyone with a different opinion is carole. LOL

      @Red Snapper They broke up officaly one time. And according to tabloids three times. Two times him and one time her if you believe them. When they were in their early twenties. What a shock. Since their last breakup in 2007 they have been solid. So you are talking about 11 years ago…..
      He cheated on her… did he really? Where is your evidence? Video’s, pictures or something. You have nothing. Only a couple of tabloidstories alluding to it. But i forgot you only believe something from tabloids when it fits your narrative. I have never said it is a fairy tail. I don’t believe in fairy tailes. LOL
      You say “As stated many times if william meets someone he loves/respects kate’s history”. Who stated that many times? You…… You have no idea about their relationship just like i don’t but i am not the one making up this narrative of their relationship.

      @nic919 You have no idea so stop pretending you do.

      • Becks1 says:

        If we all have no idea then neither do you LOL. Do you think Harry or William is going to come out and say, Kate likes to shop and roast a chicken sometimes? I mean they basically say that anyway, but at least this gives them a cover. “She shops, roasts chickens, and came up with the idea for an umbrella charity.”

        and FTR when the Heads together campaign was announced, there WAS negative feedback because of what Nic919 said. It should seem like it is streamlining funding but it makes it harder for smaller charities.

        Before, Kate would go visit a small charity that focused on mental health with small children, let’s say. Now that charity is part of HT so Kate doesn’t visit it, the charity is just part of these big HT events. People don’t hear the name, don’t see what it is actually doing, or if they do its a quick blurb in the caption of a photo or something.

        HT isn’t a bad thing necessarily. I can see what they were thinking and the benefits of it. But it does have downsides as well.

      • MrsBump says:

        I couldn’t care less about William but to say he married the last woman standing is laughable.
        While its true that the British aristo girls had no interest in either Will or Harry (who also in record discussing the difficulty of finding a wife) , there are thousands of middle class women who would have given their left arm to marry a prince.

      • Becks1 says:

        Kate is always roasting a chicken! Always! Its funny at this point. She’s keen and roasts chicken. I added the shopping bit. Its why I almost died laughing when Harry and Meghan said that he proposed over roast chicken. It’s almost like the royals sat down, said “what food can make us seem the most normal” and picked roast chicken.

      • Becks1 says:

        @mrsbump I think when people say that they mean he married the “last woman standing” out of the women he was actively friends with, seeing, even casually dating. Of course there were (and still are) plenty of women who would have married him without thinking twice. But out of sort of his large social group, Kate was it. We saw a similar thing with Harry – a few girlfriends, some more serious than others, but many of the aristos he dated didn’t want to “actually” marry him.

      • Lizabeth says:

        I don’t have any luck posting links but a Vogue article in Nov 2017 discussed all the references to roast chicken from W&K. Some of the article was a bit tongue in cheek but apparently they have mentioned chicken alot. Second place goes to curried chicken/butter chicken. (Have direct quotes on those dishes in lots of articles.) Harry mentioned roast chicken too, not only re: the engagement chicken but in his Newsweek interview he said something about sometimes getting Kate to roast a chicken for him. As the Vogue article says, it is odd to hear so much about chicken…maybe it’s a favorite or maybe it sounds so relatable or so normal as Becks1 suggested (to people who eat meat anyway)

      • notasugarhere says:

        I always find this line so amusing. The insistence that after 2007 there was never any question of them marrying. Despite Charles buying and fixing up an estate for them, which completely freaked out William so he bolted.

        If it was a lock, what’s the explanation for her being a lump (or nub!) for those years? That she couldn’t use her parents money to found a charity, found a business, learn new languages, take private speaking lessons? She did nothing to develop herself as a person during that time. But gosh, the fans insist she knew from 2007 that she was going to be the (potential) future Queen Consort. And if so, the queen of laziness did nothing to prep for that role for five years.

        It is as if her ardent fans don’t realize how much worse that makes Kate and her decade of laziness look.

      • aaa says:

        William may not have had women queuing up to become Mrs. Prince William but one of the main reasons that Kate got the ring was because the 2-3 break ups they had were brief, and while William may have chaffed at being in a relationship – he was a guy in his early-mid 20s so duh, he apparently liked being in a relationship with Kate more than he liked playing the field or pursuing long-term relationships with other women.

      • notasugarhere says:

        He wanted an always-there, always-willing to take him back, no-effort relationship. And he recognized that one day if he chose to leave Kate, he’d lose Carole.

  17. Ennie says:

    Nah, all the brouhahah with Charles and Diana forced the Queen and whimever else is in charge, to let people marey whom they wanted, not starting with William. Remember that also her dauther Anne had her own private things to tend to when se was about to marry the current guy., so it dis not start with the newer generation, the last one who had to wndure thise marriages was probably Charles and it turned out to be a disaster.

  18. Dazeem, Adele says:

    I will say this: when I look back at what Charles had to go through to marry Diana—virgin, never married, aristocratic family, etc—and look at William and Kate having lived together for YEARS prior to engagement, even—well, I definitely see a ‘modernization,’ of some sort anyway.

    PS does anyone remember when “Randy Andy” dated the soft core p#rn Star Koo Stark and everyone was worked up?

  19. Loras says:

    Well,I don’t know if it was a PR move but I did enjoy the Queen wearing the pin the Obamas gave her when she met our dictator wannabe

  20. perplexed says:

    I don’t think the Queen’s job is to be good at PR. Her job is to be Head of State and not embarrass her country or lose her dignity so that people laugh at the Head of State. In that sense, I think she’s played the long game pretty well and weathered all of the storms that came her way while keeping the institution she heads intact.

    Her ancestors were up to no good and did all kinds of weird things that those times allowed, but for the kind of modern age she was born to where she’s supposed to be some kind of symbol for people to latch on to while all of the politicians go cuckoo, I think she’s done an efficient job for the length of time she’s reigned.

  21. Kat says:

    Royal coverage on this site (and the comments that follow) is really unhinged and bizarre …

  22. Stephie says:

    The Queen has evolved over the years. Her sister couldn’t marry a good man because he was divorced and it really negatively impacted the rest of her life. If you’ve seen The Crown, that situation is even more dramatic. I’m glad she’s allowing the children and grandchildren to marry whom they wish. However, the situation with Thomas Markle is an example of the other side of the argument.

  23. Bush Davison says:

    Hi everyone, im just giving this big chance to anyone that might need the help of this perfect ethical hacker “Wilson” who rescued my 9 years relationship by revealing my wife infidelities through her whatsapp, gmail, facebook, phone text messages,all call logs and making me know the next step to pursuit after discovering that dark side of the relationship without touching her phone…His charges are affordable and 100% safe. contact him via address below…
    Email: H O T H A C K M A S T E R @ G M A I L C O M
    Whatsapp Messenger no : +1(628)-203-5823
    Website : www. hackingmaster . org