Duchess Kate broke protocol, accepted & wore a free pair of earrings

Britain's Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge talks with members of the Beavers as she visits a Scout Group in Northolt, northwest London on September 29, 2020, where she joined Cub and Beaver Scouts in outdoor activities. - The Duchess learned how the Scouts have adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and continued Scouting sessions and online activities.

Some fashion notes on Duchess Kate’s appearance at the Scouts event on Tuesday: she wore skinny jeans by ULTRA and her boots were See By Chloe, and her vest thing was from Really Wild. I maintain that Kate’s “casual” looks are generally much better than her evening looks and even her array of blue coatdresses for professional day events. Beyond the eyebrows, she looked cute at the event. So why are we still talking about it? Well…I came across this cheeseball item in the Daily Mail and I found it SUPER CURIOUS. It’s about the earrings Kate wore to the Scouts event.

Kate Middleton donned a pair of £44 delicate gold earrings gifted to her by a female designer as she visited a London Scouts Group yesterday. The Duchess of Cambridge, 38, dressed down in jeans, a favourite gilet and added a touch of glamour with the gold hoops from All The Falling Stars to meet Cub and Beaver Scouts in Northolt, west London.

The £44 earrings were crafted by Irish designer Aisling O’Brien and gifted to the Duchess during her visit to Ireland at the start of the year. Online, the brand is described as ‘including pieces that are modern and simple, designed to let the wearer’s natural beauty shine.’

But it’s not the first time she has worn the affordable independent Irish jewellery brand. Last week she stepped out in a personalised gold necklace from the brand engraved with the letters ‘G, L, C’ in honour of her children, Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two, for an outing in Battersea Park. The pieces were commissioned in March, with the Duchess going on to write a note of thanks to Aisling expressing her gratitude and love for the pieces.

[From The Daily Mail]

First of all, the Duchess of Cambridge is breaking protocol. This is not even the first time she’s broken this particular protocol. The protocol is that royals can physically “accept” gifts (because they don’t want to be rude) but they should not wear those “gifts.” Royals are not supposed to accept “freebies” in the form of jewelry or clothes. The Daily Mail even ran a huge, nasty story in 2017 about how Meghan Markle LOVED freebies as a celebrity, how Kate was so much different because Kate knows protocol and the perfect white duchess would never! So I find it curious that we’re supposed to think it’s perfectly fine for Kate to take a gift of earrings and then just add those freebies to her jewelry collection.

As for the necklace and Kate’s general jewelry vibe lately… personally, I’ve never really thought that Kate knows what to do with jewelry. She gets to borrow big, important pieces but she doesn’t know how to style them or showcase them and I think those big pieces make her uncomfortable. Pre-Meghan, Kate seemed to prefer semi-precious stones in simple settings, mostly tasteful drop earrings. That kind of stuff was what she bought for herself (with Charles’ money). But Kate has tried to copy Meghan’s jewelry aesthetic by adding some very small and delicate pieces like the necklace and these earrings.

Her Royal Highness in Battersea Park listening directly to parents about their experiences of parent-to-parent support.

Britain's Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge talks with members of the Beavers as she visits a Scout Group in Northolt, northwest London on September 29, 2020, where she joined Cub and Beaver Scouts in outdoor activities. - The Duchess learned how the Scouts have adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and continued Scouting sessions and online activities.

Britain's Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (L) reacts during her visit to a Scout Group in Northolt, northwest London on September 29, 2020, where she joined Cub and Beaver Scouts in outdoor activities. - The Duchess learned how the Scouts have adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and continued Scouting sessions and online activities.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

110 Responses to “Duchess Kate broke protocol, accepted & wore a free pair of earrings”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Khia says:

    Dependant on how much the item costs I thought if they can wear, etc?

    • MissMarierose says:

      I thought so too. And I thought those rules had more to do with not keeping the big ostentatious jewelry and luxury items they would get from the Saudis and other ME royals.

    • MissM says:

      Royals are regularly given jewelry as gifts on tour but those are official gifts and they are included in an annual report. Jewelry given to a royal during an official visit is not the property of that royal even if the gift was intended for them, it belongs to the Crown. This type of gift is under the table which is not allowed as it was a freebie from the designer, not gifted by the host.

    • OK says:

      Every very gift has to be logged and noted, there are various classes of gift, perishables, childrens toys, jewels, objet d’art/paintings etc. Each has its own rules , perishables such as a pot of honey, a wheel of cheese or an icecream cone offered on a foodie event can be consumed. Expensive wines have their own catagory.

      Basically all jewellery belongs to the Crown if presented at a royal event. The recipient gets to hold onto them and wear them for the duration but they belong to the crown.

  2. Alissa says:

    I guess I understand the rule because obviously they don’t want royals to be swayed by freebies, but I also think it’s kind of rude to not wear gifts? either way if she broke protocol she should be called out. once again they’re just showing how racist and targeted they are against Meghan.

    • JillyBeann says:

      Oh my. Sadly if this was Meg the press would be screaming bloody murder on her action…

      The jewelry is super cute though!

  3. Digital Unicorn says:

    Of course she did – she and her family have ALWAYS been about the freebies and cue the non outrage by the RRs and UK tabloids over this.

    Also its a bit rude to ‘re-gift’ something that was given to her during an official visit – its not the first time she has done this. She did the same with some baby clothes/box that she was given – it was given to an auction and IIRC it then didn’t sell.

    • notasugarhere says:

      For years, Kate has had the gifts redirected to her family. Clothing, fur hats, fur gloves, the baby necklace related to George. They’re freebies to the Middletons, then the Middletons give them to Kate, the original intended recipient. Of course they find a way around the no freebies rule; family of grifters.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      That auction was for her patronage that had to partially shut down recently due to lack of funding.
      Kate donated a very plain group of baby items with no letter to personalize it. No special packaging. And the kicker was she donated the least attractive item she was gifted when pregnant with George. The rest of the gifts were reportedly tossed, but it was thought she kept some. Wasteful.

  4. Eleonor says:

    Well well well
    Beverly Leslie voice.

  5. Mac says:

    A lot of jewelry has been gifted to her. I don’t see an issue with her wearing cheap costume jewelry if it helps a small business.

    • Seraphina says:

      I would agree with you but then heard a blogger explain her position on no free gifts being used or worn. She stated that once you begin wearing free gifts you have an ethical responsibility because your name is tied to it. The business is making money because of you; because your fans are purchasing due to you and you alone. That’s a hefty weight – if they do anything illegal or unethical your name is tied to them. Not only that but where does she draw the line? And I am sure they have friends with businesses and in wearing free gifts they may promote their friends business.
      Regardless of the opinions, I think had this been Meghan – Lord help her. Catherine the Great, top CEO of the firm can do no wrong. Unless it helps how Wills looks, then we can throw her under that freight train.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      It would help the small business even more if Kate paid for the earrings and wouldn’t break the rules.

    • Sofia says:

      Rules are rules. It doesn’t matter how cheap it is, how “costume jewellery” it looks and how big and small the business is – if the rules is no gifts from businesses no matter what, then it’s no gifts. End of.

      The earrings are less than £50. If she liked them enough, she could have paid for them.

  6. Other Renee says:

    The DM is still referring to her as “Kate Middleton” after all these years?

    • Shane says:

      Right? I guess the benchmark is Sophie, as they kindly call her Sophie Wessex – approx. 20 years of marriage… so, in another 10 years She will be Catherine Cambridge? Or are they waiting to call her Princess of Wales👀

      I remember seeing an article a while back that they’re trying to phase out the name “Kate” to Catherine, which I guess is more regal (whatever that means)

      • Becks1 says:

        They say William and her family all call her Catherine, but I don’t fully buy it. She did go by Kate when she was younger, right? Then its my guess they still call her Kate. I’m Rebecca but I’ve been called Becky since I was born, I have always tried at various phases to go to Rebecca but it never sticks, my parents would laugh their heads off if I asked them to call me Rebecca, lol. I’m Becky. So while I know some people can switch nicknames and the like, I think by the time you’re in your mid to late 20s and surrounded by the same people, its harder.

        But I think the push is because they decided Princess Catherine* and Queen Catherine sound better than Princess Kate.

        *I know she wont be Princess Catherine/Kate, but we know she’ll probably be called that.

      • L84Tea says:

        @Becks1, same here. My name is Katharine, but I’ve been called Katie since day one, and I can’t imagine being called anything else.

      • Nic919 says:

        She was called Kate for years by the media because that’s what she used. Catherine only showed up once the engagement actually happened and it was part of the white washing of her years doing not much but go on holiday and hang out at clubs and bars.

        Notice we call Catherine, Catherine Quinn, or Catherine Zeta Jones, it’s because that the name they used once they first had a public profile. Kate was Kate for a decade before the royal whitewash. It won’t change now.

    • Seraphina says:

      she may prefer Kate, it rhymes with Great.

    • Sofia says:

      I mean, I don’t see it as a big deal. They call Camilla “Camilla Parker Bowles” even though she hasn’t been married to Mr Parker Bowles for 25 years (and is now married to another man). They call Meghan “Meghan Markle” too. I think it’s a familiarity thing. You’ll be surprised at how many people in the country don’t know what titles the royals have. As for why Sophie gets called “Sophie Wessex” because it flows better IMO than “Sophie Rhys Jones”. “Catherine/Kate Cambridg”, “Meghan Sussex” and “Camilla Cornwall/Wales” don’t have that same ring. Anne is called “Princess Anne” instead of “The Princess Royal” for the same thing I said above – familiarity.

      They also do it to the males. They still call them “Prince Charles/William/Harry/Andrew/Edward” despite them having their own titles in their own right.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      It’s about name recognition. Kate was Kate Middleton in the press for 10 years. Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge is less recognizable. Diana and Sophie didn’t have that problem. Diana married very quickly and Sophie was never really a big deal to the press. So, their surnames didn’t stick like Kate’s did.

    • MsIam says:

      I thought William called her “Kate”? I remember an interview he did after one of the kids was born and he said something like “Thank goodness they take after Kate” when he mentioned something about the child. Plus I thought they were all about the oh so normal and relatable vibe?

      • Lorelei says:

        She said herself — at some engagement, I think, “I’m still very much Kate.” I forget what year it was but she definitely said it.

        They have been trying to push “Catherine” for years, but she’s always going to be casually referred to as Kate Middleton, especially for SEO purposes.

    • Carolind says:

      I still think of her as Kate Middleton. I do not think of her as royal. It’s her own fault as such a big thing was always made if the Middletons. She and William identified with them.

      A lot of women still have their maiden name in death notices in UK.

      • Nic919 says:

        Using the name she was born shouldn’t be considered an insult. There are insulting names one could use but that isn’t it.

  7. Snuffles says:

    I can’t unsee those eyebrows now.

    • LULU wang was robbed says:

      Seriously, what is going on with them? Did one of her kids draw them on with a sharpie?
      She’s always leaned a little worryingly close to the scouse brow look, now I guess she’s going all in?

    • Mac says:

      She must be using a new product and it’s not working for her.

  8. Chartreuse says:

    She looks really nice here and genuinely happy.

    • Merricat says:

      “Genuinely” is not a description I would apply to Kate Middleton. Who is Kate? We don’t know, because she’s spent her life being whatever her mother and William want.

      • Chartreuse says:

        Merricat when she’s with Willileaks she never appears to have a genuine smile. I rate this as a genuine smile. I’m mostly critical of her so just thought I’d look to the positive for once.

  9. Alexandria says:

    What’s new. White princess wannabe can do whatever she wants. Everything is alright, move along. No uproar.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I don’t understand the “no gifts” rule for royals – we certainly see some royals wearing gifted jewels (doesn’t Camilla have several significant pieces that were given to her by the Saudis?) Is it that gifts between leaders or governments are okay, but random gifts like this aren’t?

    I do think this is an odd story to run a few days after the initial event, it makes me think someone placed a call to the DM to run this – because what’s the point of the designer giving Kate something for free if it doesn’t get mentioned (i.e. theres no publicity for it?)

    Her jewelry aesthetic IS definitely changing, that necklace combined with the gold bangle are very very Meghan.

    • Nic919 says:

      The rule is probably no free gifts for Meghan but it’s okay for everyone else.

      Kate and the Middletons have been scamming free things and massive discounts for decades now and it’s rarely criticized. What’s another pair of earrings at this point?

    • L84Tea says:

      Heck, someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe even Diana wore gifted jewelry. She had a really magnificent diamond and sapphire set of matching necklace and earrings that I’m pretty sure were a Saudi gift to her. She wore those pieces all the time.

      • Chrissy says:

        I think that was part of wedding present to her. That sapphire necklace was magnificent. Being my September birthstone, I wouldn’t say no to borrowing it. As if….

    • Sofia says:

      Even if someone placed a call to the DM, I do wonder why they ran the story. Surely they would know that accepting gifts like this isn’t allowed therefore it would NOT look good on Kate if they highlighted this fact? Or did that just slip their mind?

    • Bella DuPont says:

      Yup. And it doesnt suit her. 😞 She should go back to her own style.

      I like her outfit though (with the gilet) 🙃

    • Lorelei says:

      @Becks my guess (this is total speculation) that the reason for the freebie is to make Kate aware of the brand and hope she likes it. Even if she can’t wear the earrings, she can buy things from them in the future, like this necklace, and THEN the designer’s name can be published all over and Kate’s fans can start buying their CopyKates.

      But that still doesn’t explain this strange article which definitely reads as an ad for the designer…is it possible that the jewelry designer leaked it to the Mail? They might have decided the boost in profile and revenue was worth more than whatever Kate herself might buy in the future since they’d obviously lose her as a customer by doing this. But either way, the Mail decided to publish this shady piece!

  11. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    A bit shady of the Daily Heil. Are their knives out for the Duchess of Beige? Since Meghan and Harry firmly control their own news cycle, stepping into the light periodically to dazzle us and show us what good incarnate looks like, the tabloids have nada – save recycling old talking points. Wiglet and Penis with Teeth had two years in the sun when they could do no wrong, because Black Duchess. Now, they’ve got nowhere to hide.
    I mean, were they really that dumb, to think their coronation as Monarchs of White Anglo Saxon Protestantism by the tabloids would last forever? Did PWT conveniently forget how they treated his own mother?

    • Ariel's Song says:

      @ Andrew’sNemesis
      First off Penis With Teeth- 😂😂😂 Chef’s Kiss!!
      I mean that was his mother not his father. As hellish as it sounds, I can honestly see him thinking that. He will do anything, put Kate thru anything to get to the crown. He’s basically playing a modern Charles neh all his accomplishments of course. No matter how much of a POS he is you can’t take that from him.

  12. Ainsley7 says:

    She’s not even allowed to accept gifts like this. Anything from a business is supposed to be sent back to the business. Royal women sometimes receive “official gifts” of jewelry. Usually from a country or something. The Saudi’s are pretty big on gifting jewelry. All the jewelry is owned by the crown. The person who received it is usually allowed to keep it and wear it. It goes into the crowns collection after they die. It’s a rule that was created specifically because Diana got to keep some of the major jewelry she had been given. They don’t even get to keep the jewelry they receive as wedding presents now. Kate breaking the rule over £44 is really stupid. She could have just paid the designer if she liked them so much.

    • Becks1 says:

      Ah okay. That makes sense and is what I was wondering in my comment above. So the big bling Camilla has gotten from other countries is actually owned by the crown (and then of course Charles does buy her big pieces too.)

      For 44 pounds it seems to me that Kate should have just bought the earrings.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sophie has a few of those too, that we rarely see in public. They are not her private property, they’re owned by the government. One is her multigemstone necklace ‘given to her’ by a dictator (Bahrain?). She wears it to things like receptions and State Dinners, where no one bothers to photograph her or make note of her jewelry.

      • Lorelei says:

        I guess it’s possible that Kate DID retroactively pay for the earrings if she liked them enough to wear —we would never know — but it’s still interesting that the Mail definitely frames it as “Kate took a freebie!”

      • FicklePickle says:

        They changed the rules in the mid-00s because Camilla wore a ruby and diamond necklace so over the top it could have only come from a Middle Eastern royal family, and somehow it was discovered that there really weren’t any rules about gifts.

        I’m not sure if it was applied retroactively, though, because nobody seems to have ever said. My guess is that they didn’t want the headache of trying to figure out how all the gifts previously received were disposed of, so Camilla’s big bling does actually belong to her personally.

    • Lady D says:

      If it’s jewelry I’m given as a wedding gift, I’m going to keep it. Sorry, not sorry. What are they going to do? Break my fingers to pry them from my hand, break into my safe, burgle my bank account, dissolve my wedding? How exactly do they get these ‘gifts’ from the recipient and who is allowing this. It makes no sense to have to hand over your gift, especially if you use throughout your lifetime. It’s yours, and no one should have the right to claim it. No wonder the old biddy is so rich, she’s still stealing only this time from her own family.

      • Becks1 says:

        I feel like wedding gifts would be different? Or personal gifts? Like Kate can still receive gifts from family and friends etc. She has that diamond and ruby necklace that I think we’ve just been told was a gift (I cant remember if it was specified to be a wedding gift or not.)

  13. theothermadeline says:

    Im confused as to whether this is a gift? It says the pieces were commissioned in March – doesn’t commissioning generally mean they were a custom order?

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      Unless the designer said ‘I’ll make it a gift’, and Kate went along with it. (The whole family is rumoured to be tighter than a badger’s bottom.) Which some would call ‘merching’, no?
      I mean, Meghan can open a car door and cause a whole new news cycle built on frothing outrage, but Kate accepts gifts and it’s ‘ooh, she’s so regal, what a perfect future queen.’

    • Becks1 says:

      The earrings were a gift, the necklace was commissioned.

      • Edna says:

        Weren’t there posters the other day saying she previously owned those necklaces and wasn’t copying Meghan? If I’m recalling correctly it was in the original thread about the Scout visit and people were defending Kate cause commentators said she was copying Meghan by wearing those necklaces.

      • Becks1 says:

        Those people were incorrect :-) This is the first time we’ve seen her wearing that necklace. she had a necklace with George’s full name on it – but it was longer and the disc was bigger. I don’t think we’ve seen her wear this kind of delicate layered necklace before.

      • notasugarhere says:

        That George necklace was another freebie, redirected through the Middletons, then handed to Kate.

      • Lorelei says:

        Becks and Nota are right — the layered necklace is new (at least publicly).

        A few years ago, a different company “gifted” a G necklace to Pippa after Kate had George, which Pippa of course “gifted” it to Kate. Then of course it resulted in a ton of publicity and a million new orders from Kate fans for the jeweler.

        It literally says right here in the article that they sent it to Pippa to give to Kate, so they must have been aware of the “no freebies” rule. They renamed that particular necklace “The Duchess,” lol.

        https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mums-cunning-plan-kate-middleton-21939438

  14. bamaborn says:

    Well, I guess that kinda knocks George and his Tooth off the front pages. And Malta apologized to boot. Lol

  15. Noki says:

    I have always thought her engagement ring is horrible, i mean truly ugly. Diana got away with it in the 8Os because it atleast went along with the eras fashion. And by now i would just wear my wedding band,some people will do the engagement/wedding ring combo but she just wears her engagement ring. And unless Diana asked for it to be passed down,shame on William for not being a little bit more romantic and creative.

    • Nic919 says:

      It’s also cursed. Charles and Diana had the most famous bad marriage out there so wanting to wear a ring that represents that has always been bizarre. Diana simply picked the gaudiest ring from a catalogue so it’s not even like Charles designed this monstrosity. And they certainly haven’t broken the bad luck because rumours of cheating by William abound and they always look like work colleagues when they are together.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Shame on William stealing Harry’s ring out of the vault in the first place. But William 1) didn’t care enough to get Kate her own ring 2) didn’t want to spend time designing something unique for her 3) is a known cheapskate and 4) wanted the PR of using Diana’s cursed ring.

      • Noki says:

        @Nota was that ring meant for Harry? Cant picture Meghan wearing that clunky ring,I wonder if in royalty it would be frowned upon if Kate asked for a change,she has the ten year anniversary as an excuse.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They were each allowed to chose one private item of Diana’s jewelry. William chose the watch because he learned to tell time with it. Harry chose the ring, something to do with feeling the ring whenever he held his mum’s hand.

        The tabloid/stan fiction about Harry giving the ring to William? Nope, Harry was caught publicly surprised by both the engagement and the use of his ring.

      • trashaddict says:

        Wow this underlines that William can be an arsehole.

  16. emmy says:

    My jewelry taste certainly has evolved as I reached my mid 30s and I’ve seen this with many of my friends. It doesn’t always mean you copy someone! Sometimes I see my sister wear something and “copy” the style, so what? She has great style, it’s a compliment.

    As for the gift, who cares. Really.

    • Sofia says:

      There are rules she has to follow as a working royal. It goes for everyone. If she liked them so much, she should have paid for them.

      I doubt you would be saying “who cares” if Meghan broke the rules.

      • emmy says:

        People here are obsessed with the Kate and Meghan comparisons, it’s getting weird and obsessive. You don’t know me. I wouldn’t give a flying vegetable if Meghan had accepted freebies while working for the Firm. Archie wore gifted pieces in that one picture with Harry, right? He looked adorable, who cares where a baby hat came from. These people live lives of unimaginable luxury, none of it really earned. I really do not care at this point about the minutiae of protocols. All the honking pieces of jewelry the women wear are not “gifted” but certainly shouldn’t be considered okay. Protocols are a distraction from the fact that the royals shouldn’t own any of it.

      • Sofia says:

        Those pieces were gifted by a PM IIRC. As said above, the rules are slightly different. If it’s from a business, they’re not allowed to accept it – end of. If it’s from a country or given on a official tour, they can wear it.

        Rules are rules. She has to follow the rules if she wants to keep taking my along with everyone else’s money. If she doesn’t want to play by those rules, I recommend that she leaves. She knows where the exit is.

      • Nancy says:

        Agree with you 100% Emmy.

      • equality says:

        The rules apparently have loopholes where they can accept and use things of less than 150 pounds value. I think, the bottom line is, that they don’t really own the things; they are just allowed use during their lifetime then the items revert to the monarch who decides what is done with them.

      • emmy says:

        @Sofia, rules are rules? Someone makes those rules, they’re not laws of physics. I don’t care about those rules, apparently you do. That’s fine but again, the big picture of the lives these people lead should be the real issue. But they seem to successfully distract people from that with silly rules that make no difference. Sure she could use her own money. Or rather “her own” money.

      • Merricat says:

        @emmy, if the rules don’t matter, why is Meghan constantly punished for breaking them? What we object to is not the rule itself, but the fact that when Meghan breaks protocol, she’s an insult to the Queen, but when Kate breaks protocol, the rules are “silly.” But I do agree that the real issue is that Kate has been sponging off the people for years without producing any tangible or notable service in exchange.

      • Sid says:

        Emmy, people here aren’t “obssessed” with Meghan and Kate comparisons so much as they are bringing up the fact that Meghan gets abused by the British media and by lunatics online for things that Kate does with no eyebrows being raised. If this had been Meghan wearing jewelry gifted by a business, the article would have been dragging her from here to eternity, it would have been digging into the business to look for something nefarious to link to Meghan, and then all the British media outlets would have run the story for days. You have entire forums and twitter accounts dedicated to harassing Meghan, even going so far as to show up to her engagements to try and heckle her and even discussing trying to stab her belly to “prove” that she was wearing a fake pregnancy belly (yes, this really was discussed by the loud, lunatic fringe), and a lot of that nonsensical behavior is egged on by the British media. So yes, people here are absolutely going to comment if they see Kate getting a pass for things that Meghan would not.

      • emmy says:

        Meghan has left the royal family with her husband, I wish them all the best and say good for them. So why do people keep bringing up the “if she did this she would be dragged” stuff? And don’t say because the media does because the constant outrage one way or another is nothing but clicks and money in their pockets.

        And I had to laugh at people are not obsessed. Of course you are.

      • blue36 says:

        Kate can now accept freebies, etc. she wants without getting criticized for it anymore. Implicitly she knows that because Meghan still exists there won’t be a whiff of criticism coming her way. I don’t think anyone has been calculating her clothing spending right now, she had quite a few new pieces these past few months. She should have just paid for it IMO. Also it wasn’t just the media, when Meghan was starting to get criticized for her spending Kate came out for her engagements wearing re-wears, when she was getting criticized for wearing brands that are not British, Kate came out wearing British clothing. So yeah no its not just the media, KP uses vitriol directed towards Meghan for their own advantage. Someone mentioned this before, but Kate has been the number 1 beneficiary of the smear campaign against Meghan.

      • Gingerbee says:

        Why are you, Emmy bringing Archie in this conversation. Yes, we are bringing this up, because it is hypocritical. If is was Meghan, the BM and trolls would be blasting her for it.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      Re the gift, I rather agree with Emmy. They’re £44, who cares? A small business gets a name check. (Shrug)

      • Sofia says:

        Rules are rules at the end of the day. If Kate breaks it one time, what’s to stop her from accepting the next gift priced at let’s say 50 pounds? After all it’s only 6 pounds more. And then that number gets higher and higher each time until what? She’s accepting 4 figure gifts for free?

        Since it was less than 50 pounds, she could have just paid for them. She broke the rules for this.

    • Nic919 says:

      It wouldn’t be a big deal if the media didn’t go insane accusing Meghan of merching and other nonsense. Stating that it’s not a big deal when there is documented evidence of a double standard in play is obvious white privilege because it’s waiving away rules broken by the white princess when we know the same latitude is not provided to the non white princess.

      It could be easily remedied by paying for it, so it’s curious that this hasn’t happened.

    • Merricat says:

      Considering that Kate is rather a stickler regarding OTHER people following protocol, it’s pretty much on the Cambridge hypocrisy brand.

    • Merricat says:

      I have to laugh at someone who comes to a Meghan-friendly website to complain. You are free to go elsewhere, you know. Piers Morgan and his ilk make it a point to always have something Meghan-related to complain about up, despite their departure from the family, unto the present day, and those clicks and buys don’t benefit anyone but them and the rest of the racist mob. If you’re not obsessed with Meghan, why do you keep commenting on stories about her? Just ignore them. I promise we won’t miss you.

      • emmy says:

        Oh WOW. That is so nice, fall in line or leave? This site is not so much Meghan-friendly as it’s a place where Kate is made into the Antichrist. I didn’t even criticize Meghan. At all. I like her and said I wish her the best. My mistake seems to be not hating on Kate at all times. That’s crazy and not “Meghan-friendly”.

      • SomeChick says:

        Kate is not “made into the Antichrist.” People often compliment her here. And Meghan isn’t free from criticism here either. It’s not so rigid as you make it seem.

        Pointing out that she is treated very differently by the media is not a slam on Kate. It is a slam on the media.

        It is true and the media should be ashamed. They know exactly what they are doing. They have set up this dynamic and people are reacting to it. We can see what they are doing. It’s quite nasty and unfair. And they profit from it!

        As far as breaking protocol goes, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

        I know I shouldn’t personalize this, but my name is actually Emmy, so seeing these comments is a bit jarring for me personally, haha.

    • Amy Too says:

      Emmy, I’m noticing that you keep contradicting yourself. You said that your taste has organically changed over the years and it doesn’t mean you’re copying and then immediately said you sometimes copy your sister but it’s a compliment not nefarious. In another comment you said the media doesn’t have a reason to comment on Meghan vs Kate anymore with every protocol violation because she’s not a member of the BRF anymore but then you immediately say that the only reason they constantly report on her for her supposed violations is clicks and money.

      Do you know you’re doing this? Which arguments are you actually trying to put forward? That Kate’s not copying and her choices and taste are just evolving or that she is copying but it’s no big deal? And do the British media no longer write articles about Meghan and her breaking protocol so we need to stop saying “If Meghan did this, the media would drag her,” or are you trying to say the dragging doesn’t matter because it’s all for clicks?

      You’re doing a lot of “You guys are wrong/lying because that thing isn’t even happening and isn’t true. But if it is happening and it is true then it’s not a big deal and doesn’t matter because….” Generally one argues one or the other of these positions, not both.

  17. Harper says:

    They would have roasted Meghan over some hot coals for taking a freebie and promoting it by wearing it to a royal work event. This is the double standard that the press lives by because Meghan has too many gifts as a human and they need to take her down asap. Kate, on the other hand, is just Kate. Don’t pick at her because apart from her sartorial choices and big smile and hair, there’s not much to be jealous of.

  18. Scollins says:

    I don’t think she looks good. Looks like what a retiree would wear to a community meeting in the 60s. Her fashion sense is just awful. Her hair is not so great either. Maybe if she cut it a bit and straightened it adding a shine booster.

  19. Jolie says:

    I thought half the jewels in the RF’s collection were gifts -quite an interesting site for those who want to know more:

    https://www.harpersbazaar.com.au/culture/british-royal-tiaras-18106

    The tiara: The Kent City of London Fringe Tiara.

    The history: As the name suggests, the City of London gave this tiara to Princess Marina on her wedding day. It features diamond spires set in gold.

    The current wearer: Princess Michael of Kent.

    The Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Tiara.

    The history: Made for the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville in 1919, she then passed it on to Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, sometime in the 40s. It went unseen for decades until Princess Eugenie of York wore it on her wedding day. It incorporates rose-cut diamonds in a kokoshnik-style arc with six emeralds. The centre emerald is rumoured to weigh 93 carats.

    The current wearer: Princess Eugenie of York.

    The tiara: The Festoon Tiara.

    The history: A privately-owned tiara, this piece was given to Princess Anne by a shipping company in 1973. Her daughter-in-law, Autumn Phillips, wore it on her wedding day.

    The current wearer: Anne, Princess Royal.

    The tiara: The Kent City of London Fringe Tiara.

    The history: As the name suggests, the City of London gave this tiara to Princess Marina on her wedding day. It features diamond spires set in gold.

    The current wearer: Princess Michael of Kent.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Most of those aren’t private property. They are, as described above, gifts to ‘The Crown’ that are in the government collection.

      The Greville ones are different. The owner, a friend of the Queen Mum, left those items to her privately in her will.

      The book The Queen’s Jewels by Leslie Field is an interesting look at items that are privately owned by Lizzie Windsor.

      • Carolind says:

        I think one of the Grevilles was actually a relative of the QM. Could have been a sister or niece. I am going to google. Anyone interested should do likewise.

        I did google this and no trace of being related. The whole relationship is really interesting though and worth a look.

  20. Mariane says:

    Nothing new as she regularly wears brands of her friends (jigsaw, friend Tabitha Webb’s label, Lady Natasha Rufus Isaacs of Beulah..etc). She even got her friend Emilia Jardine-Paterson to redecorate her Kensington apartment curtsy of taxpayers money ofcourse.
    She’s lucky to not have to go through scrutiny now.

  21. Ripper says:

    I think it’s quite interesting that Kate’s usually jewelry style is the one necklace or a pair of statement earrings. These teeny gold pieces is a very Meghan look and just another instance where Kate seems to be SWF-ing Meg.

  22. Lizzie says:

    IIRC Meghan wore her own jewelry that she bought from Jennifer Meyer. Jennifer Meyer put Meghan’s picture wearing the jewelry on her website and it was a huge deal and she was asked to take the picture down. It was widely speculated that the deal was Meghan was going to get a commission – no proof of course but the haters were happy to say ‘oh you know she is grifting’.
    Anyone speculating Kate is getting a kickback from the company? Of course not. Anyone demanding Kate be stripped of her title for blatantly breaking rules. Of course not.

    Edit, just copied this from Connacht Tribune Sept 25;
    Aisling O’Brien’s website crashed on Wednesday night when orders poured in for the piece from around the world. The necklace costs €109 with initials, while the earrings retail for €49.

    Similar push for the designer in the DM again? Hard to believe Kate isn’t getting backend money.

    • blue36 says:

      Yeah and what about Natasha Rufus Isaac, that’s Kate’s friend and Kate has been wearing her designs quite often, but they aren’t going after her either.

  23. Seraphina says:

    God does have a sense of humor, Kate is FQC and she can’t carry off some of the world’s most gorgeous gems. WOW.

  24. Angela says:

    oyals can accept gifts up to a certain amount of money. It’s just like government officials in the US ..

    The policy states that anything gifted from a private citizen should be refused if “there are concerns about the propriety or motives of the donor or the gift itself.” Otherwise, every gift from a citizen not known to the royal family is first looked over for safety reasons and then could actually be accepted and used under the condition that the item isn’t worth more than $200. If it cannot be used it may be donated to charity. However, there is always the possibility that it may be destroyed and discarded.

    • Merricat says:

      Comparing this to U.S. government officials during the most corrupt regime in the history of the country is probably not the look Kate was going for.

  25. Beach Dreams says:

    Nothing new for Kate. She’s had her hand out for freebies since the dating years. On another note…damn those eyebrows are distracting. Last time I remember them looking this awful was at Commonwealth Day 2019.

  26. sara says:

    Don’t they get free/cheaper cars? They have a deal with Range Rover?

  27. Lizzie says:

    Where is Prince Philip saying he is disappointed that she doesn’t support the queen ?

  28. yinyang says:

    She looks nice in these pictures, I guess if you take a billion, youre bound to find a few, dailymail posted some really bad pics though, lol. Her style looks very retro, 1970 jetset style. Why does she need to pose with more black people, it’s getting weird now.

    • Watson says:

      Your comment made me laugh cause the photos with black people def increased 100 percent once the royal family got branded as racist for the treatment of Megan markle. It reminded me of that line “i can’t be racist because look i have black friends and coworkers!”. 🤣

  29. Watson says:

    Her accepting gifts is meh. The jewelry itself is meh. Her outfit is meh. She is a nice looking woman, but she remains as interesting as a bowl of cold oatmeal. Star power can’t be purchased, or gifted. *shrug*

  30. Meg says:

    So shes either copying diana or meghan so she seemingly has no individuality or she thinks its inferior or bad so she doesn’t express it.
    she doesnt seem to bond with women as she seems to see them as competition
    What a lonely life especially with will as a husband

  31. CidyKitty(CidySmiley) says:

    I dont understand how wearing different jewelry is copying someone else I’m sorry. My jewelry changes all the time, I guess I just dont get it.

  32. CrystalBall says:

    What happened to her huge Kiki McDonough earring collection, precious stones surrounded by diamonds? She amassed this big cache which has completely disappeared since Meghan showcased a more casual style. Her tunnel-visioned fans always howled the message that her extravagant spending was necessary and right as she had to build a collection worthy of a duchess. So dear tunnel visioneers, why has the classic and rightful collection already been tossed aside for new trinkets?

    • Nic919 says:

      You are correct. We haven’t seen Kiki’s for a while and she has at least a hundred earrings from her. Maybe Carole has them now?

  33. Dee says:

    She’s already done this before. She had a necklace that celebrated George’s birth that was gifted to her sister, who passed it on to Kate. So they found a way to try to skirt the rules.

  34. pasdesmots says:

    Gosh, these eyebrows……

    I swear, they sat next to me while I had a serious comversation with my daughter