Back in 2007, the Queen felt Carole Middleton ‘was not right or acceptable’


During quieter gossip days, I tend to just google various royals to see if any of them are up to anything interesting. Which is why I know that certain outlets – The Daily Mirror and the Daily Express especially – endlessly recycle old stories and old quotes and try to create weird clickbait stories. Sometimes it works, which is why very stale royal tea often gets presented as some kind of “news” in certain outlets. I think that’s what’s happening here, but it’s really interesting. The Daily Mirror recycled old quotes from Prince William and then-Kate Middleton’s famous 2007 breakup and repackaged them to make it sound like the royals still probably hate Kate’s pushy mother Carole Middleton. This is a “new story,” published this week, and it’s being picked up by other outlets. It’s very weird:

Kate Middleton reportedly felt “isolated” when Prince William’s pals and palace officials made “snobby jibes” about her mum Carole Middleton. The couple briefly split up in 2007 as the media reported at the time that Kate tried to laugh off the jibes but ultimately worried she would never be accepted within William’s aristocratic circle.

Prince William’s friends would “ridicule” Carole’s former career as an air stewardess, as reported in The Mirror in April 2007 during the couple’s short-lived break. Furthermore, courtiers also said Kate was unsuitable for William as Carole did not speak eloquently enough. The Daily Mirror’s Royal Correspondent at the time Vanessa Allen reported that a royal insider said: “She [Carole] is pushy. Rather twee and incredibly middle class. She uses words such as ‘pleased to meet you’, ‘toilet’, and ‘pardon’.”

Kate had apparently tried to laugh it off, but became increasingly isolated and abandoned as she feared she would never be accepted by William’s pals, who are the upper-crust of British society.

The Prince was said to have enjoyed taking breaks from the pressures of the highest echelons by relaxing at Kate’s £1million family five-bedroom home. Another Palace insider added: “William got on well with Carole. He liked flopping down on the sofas of their Berkshire home, enjoying the normality of that. The Queen was fond of Kate and liked her father. But let’s just say there was a feeling that Mrs Middleton was not right or acceptable.”

Carole raised eyebrows when, on first meeting the monarch, she greeted her with “Pleased to meet you” instead of “Hello Ma’am”.

Carole and former pilot husband Michael became self-made millionaires through their successful business Party Pieces, a mail-order firm for kids’ costumes. Neighbours of the Middletons at the time reportedly branded the family as “ghastly” people who were “social climbers” and accused Carole of grooming Kate to be a royal bride. Reports at the time added that Prince William couldn’t “away from the fact his future mother-in-law was looked down upon in senior royal circles”.

Within a few months after publishing, Kate and William were back on.

[From The Daily Mirror]

People who just started following royal gossip when Meghan came along really never knew that the British press was often critical of Kate, William and the Middleton family back in the day. Back in 2006-07, Kate was definitely seen as one of the more suitable options for William, but it was widely known/considered that Kate did nothing but wait around for William, and that she had a pushy, gauche, ghastly mother out of a Jane Austen novel. Even though there were qualms about Carole, the Queen absolutely did try to push William into marrying Kate and there were definitely some efforts made by the palace to start treating her like William’s future bride. The problem? William didn’t want that. William kept dumping her to try his luck with other women. Kate played the waiting game and it worked.

As for why this is coming out again and why other outlets are picking it up… it’s a mystery. The easy explanation is that the Cambridges are on their summer holiday and the British papers are looking at no big royal stories for the next six to eight weeks or so. So maybe they decided to poke at Kate, William and Carole a little bit for fun. The more convoluted explanation is that perhaps William has let it be known that the Middletons are no longer under his protection? I keep thinking about how the Middleton PR operation went into f–king overdrive a month ago ahead of the fakakta statue unveiling, all because William told Kate she could not attend it. Kate basically threw a week-long pity party for herself in the press, letting it be known that she alone was the keen linchpin and without her, the unveiling would end in disaster. Carole even got into the action, letting it be known that she was William’s “second mum” and she’s a better mother than Diana. I wonder if that was some kind of turning point for William.


***File Photo***

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN, Backgrid.

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

333 Responses to “Back in 2007, the Queen felt Carole Middleton ‘was not right or acceptable’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Vivica says:

    Well, she’s not. Looks like they finally got something right.

    • Moxylady says:

      Oh wow. Kate was so isolated. Just like Meghan. Which I am assuming is the comparison Kate wanted? Ugh whatever. And who cares if they are social climbing gauche and horrible? She’s the only one who would take William. Let that sink in.

    • SuSuSusio says:

      I have a very different take.
      I think they’re making an argument that Kate, the savior of the monarchy, is really the unacceptable one.
      They’re using her parents (particularly her mum, cause they’re always happier to attack a woman) to remind us of “Waity Katey” and how he kept breaking up with her.

      It’s small first steps, but still the overriding voice is to pick apart Kate and stop presenting her as the future of the Monarchy and saintly future queen.

      Gee…who might want that that message out there?

      • AnneSurely says:

        That’s exactly what it is. Note that it starts as a criticism of Carol, but quickly dives into ‘those Middletons are all ghastly social climbers and everyone hates them’. They’re testing the waters to see if the public has an appetite for Kate criticism.

      • Lori says:

        This is just an example of the Press proving that all the marry-ins are treated the same. “But but , we treated Kate like sh!t too, and Sophie and Sarah and even Diana. So obviously we werent racists to Megan. We just followed standard protocol because no body is good enough for our Royals”.

      • Kalana says:

        They treated Philip badly too. Even other royals aren’t good enough.

      • Maria says:

        And yet they treated Lord Snowdon wonderfully.
        Philip wasn’t even really treated that badly.

        It’s the women who get the focus. Particularly if they’re not white.

      • Courtney B says:

        Yep the married ins are always raked over the coals. Philip was treated very badly but it was more behind the scenes. The Queen’s uncle David Bowes Lyon was a really awful person, for many reasons, and tried to make his life as unpleasant as possible. Maybe that’s why Philip was supposedly one of the more understanding family members to Harry and Meghan. But comparing the treatment Fergie, Kate, et al received in comparison to Meghan is just apples to oranges. Meghan was always going to be attacked. Especially to boost Kate. She was American, an outsider, divorced, an actress. But it was her race that tipped the scales from the normal nastiness into the racist stratosphere.

      • HeyJude says:

        They literally said here “Kate worried she’ll never be accepted by William’s aristocratic friends” and she never has been. She’s not wanted. And they’re letting it be known.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Don’t forget Meghan was the wife to the spare. No matter what she was to be attacked. The spare, their spouse and those resulting children are all there to throw under the bus to protect the heir and their family. It’s in the system.

      • BabsORIG says:

        @Wiglet Watcher, let’s say, for argument sakes, that William was the one that married Meghan and Harry married Kate, do you think Kate would have been treated like Meghan was treated just because she was the spare’s wife? Do you think Kate would have been trashed to elevate Meghan? Me thinks NO. Even if Meghan had married William, she would still have not been good enough for the all white establishment. Kate would have been elevated at Meghan’s expense, even though Kate is the spare’s wife. So the claim that Meghan was still going to be treated whichever way because she was the spare’s wife can never apply to Meghan, because if the spare had married the white woman and the heir the black one the racism subjected to Meghan would still have been equally awful if not even worse. Meghan was treated the way she was treated not because she is the spare’s wife but because she is a black woman, plain and simple.

    • minx says:

      I don’t like any of these people, but the “so-and-so’s not good enough” sneering is galling. The so-called “royals” are a bunch of lazy, homely freeloaders, thieves, criminals, pedophiles and illiterates who live off what their ancestors stole. Big deal. Nothing admirable about any of them.

    • Beth says:

      Yikes!! Thank God the grandchildren look like Michael!

    • Beth says:

      Thank God the children look like Michael!

  2. Becks1 says:

    This is VERY interesting in my opinion. The mirror is literally running a story about their story in 2007, talking about how unacceptable Carole was.

    Why now? Just a slow week in royal gossip? In that case, there’s always a fake story to write about Meghan, which probably gets more clicks. So why this story that reminds us:
    1) That Kate is not an aristocrat and was never really accepted in those circles
    2) Will and Kate broke up for months in 2007
    3) Carole is a pushy social climber who used to be a flight attendant, she was “ghastly” and
    4) the Queen did not like Carole from the start.

    Those are all interesting things to be reminded of, right? Methinks the Middletons went a little too far in May and June.

    Also though how “ghastly” to be looked down on because you said “pleased to meet you” and not “hello.”

    • Seraphina says:

      Middletons need to remember to things:
      1 – They can ALWAYS be put in their place
      2 – This is not the 1500s where people die young and history can be rewritten. We now have documentation and it’s forever on the internet.

      • Kfg says:

        He’s getting ready to divorce mumbles and showing she is a social climber. He just let Carole know they’re not needed, or maybe this is charles…

      • BooyahB!itches says:

        Divorce. (*laughing*) Never gonna happen. William doesn’t have it in him.

      • HeyJude says:

        @Booyah William literally chased the closest human being to him for all of his life, Harry, off the continent and out of the royal family over Will’s insane jealousy of him. He was fine with his brother’s wife potentially killing herself from the intolerable stress William orchestrated against her. He was fine with his baby nephew facing the threat of crazed stalkers potentially harming them when Will lobbied his dad to pull Harry’s family’s protection.

        You underestimate what he has in him.

        He’s a fundamentally a brutal tyrant at heart still and the moment no longer wants Kate, he’ll viciously discard her without a second thought just as he’s done with his brother, his sister-in-law, and his only blood nephew and now niece.

        This is the man who caused a maternity nurse to kill herself over the fit he threw at the hospital administrators when she was accidentally duped by a radio station into giving them a maternity update by pretending to be from the palace. And all Will did was give a couple sentences of a statement and went on with his life never looking back at the devastation he caused after.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Always a fan of your comments and this one is spot on.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Hey Jude, I agree. Appreciated your Beatles/Yoko Ono analogy on a different thread. Whether William was born that way like Ken Wharfe implied or a result of the golf club injury to his head-which, having recent conversations with a doctor about mBTI’s and studies with people that have road rage tendencies having a different protein show up in their blood (not conclusive at this point he did say). It’s just odd that so many of the stories of William’s ‘incandescent rage’ are out there. Or, he is simply a pr#ck and is angry that his scapegoat isn’t around any more to deflect from his bullticky.

    • C-Shell says:

      Becks1, I’m absolutely riveted by this rehash and the timing of it. Their campaign several weeks ago, with Uncle Gary spouting off everywhere, including Australia FFS, and that article about Carole’s superior mothering, went way too far. Someone has put the brakes on that since the fakakta unveiling and Mumbles poor performance with Jill Biden. The sniffy take on how the joint op-ed with FLOTUS stepped too far into political partisanship, the weird reporting on house-hunting near the Middleton Compound, and now this … the wee knives are starting to come out. And I’m here for it.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yup yup, and I’m wondering what the final straw was. The article about how Carole is a better mother than Diana? (which came out the week of Diana’s birthday?) The article referring to Prince William as the “husband of the future queen”? The pushes from Uncle Gary about skipping Charles?

        IDK, but we talked yesterday about how quiet the Middletons have been (so my guess is they were told to stand down) and now we’re getting these weird rehashes of old classist criticisms.

      • C-Shell says:

        We’ll never know, of course. Certainly the cumulative effect of all of the above, on top of Poor Will laying his weary head on Carole’s lap, etc., has been piling up for a while. I tend to think Charles may have played a significant role in shutting the bullish!t down when Uncle Gary was going around saying Cain and Unable should climb past him onto the thrones.

      • Over it says:

        I think it was the article calling william the husband of the future queen that really did it for William. We always say on here how much like Charles William is. It would have absolutely made him incandescent with rage and jealousy that Kate was being hailed as the future queen and him nothing more than her sidekick. I don’t think Carole calling herself a better mother to him than Diana was would bother him as much because a couple weeks before that he has absolutely no problem gaslighting his mom when giving that speech about the Bashir interview.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Becks and C-Shell I’m coming to sit with you two on this one. The timing is SO intriguing.

        The one that referred to William as “the husband of the future Queen” still makes me cackle every time it’s mentioned.

        ETA: totally agree with Shawna’s comment below. The fact that these articles were coming right after the other, day after day, was just bizarre and that alone probably pissed off a lot of the wrong people just in that one week. People who were already wary of Kate after her funeral shenanigans.

      • Shawna says:

        Becks1 – the final straw – maybe it was just the clustering of ALL of those articles/interviews at one time. Any one of them, or them spaced out months apart, might not have made the same effect as all of them together.

        My view *had* been that it was Carole’s Diana-bashing article, which was so over the top that I read it outloud in full to my husband, but Over it makes a good point re: gaslighting.

    • L84Tea says:

      I’m with you in that there is something very fishy going on with this being released. I’ve been thinking ever since the statue unveiling that Carole and Kate took it way too far. I believe their little public meltdown pushed William and/or Charles over the edge.

      • BooyahB!itches says:

        I hope it has, because only if Charles, Camilla, and others lend their support to William will he ever divorce Kate, because otherwise it will never happen. Charles will push him to do it so that it reflects badly on the “timing” for Will to be king…they won’t skip over Charles if Willee-won’tee and Waity are divorcing….

    • Eating Popcorn says:

      I think Charles has officially entered the RR game. It’s not just the future future keen, it’s the public really want the monarchy to skip Charles campaign. So, we will see several take downs over the next several weeks, I imagine they will all be the slow drip. William and Kate vacation expense… an uncle take down, more Carole take downs…

      • Mac says:

        That odd bit about concerns over what Harry might write about Camilla makes me think Charles is on the PR offensive to protect her.

    • Nic919 says:

      It is interesting that they are bringing out the anti Carole stories again. That said, while the classicism is snobby, Carole herself was ok with openly trashing Meghan and her work ethic because it made her own daughter look lazy and incompetent so if Carole gets burned herself by the same people she’s been desperate to fit in with, that’s on her. This is a family that wears signet rings and wants a title so I can’t feel bad when they get rejected by snobby fools while attacking innocent people who mind their own business. And let’s not forget that Carole is likely to have been the one to spread the false crying story, since she speaks with Camilla Tominey. Reap what you sow Carole, it’s been well earned.

      • Seraphina says:

        High five on your comment Nic919.

      • Over it says:

        I agree with you Nic919, Carole will forever be on my shit list . I do have a question about her? Does she have a drinking problem? She always looks tipsy to me.

      • Becks1 says:

        100%. I don’t really have any sympathy for Carole at this point, she was fine with the press when they were trashing Meghan (and I agree that she was Camilla’s source on the crying story, so that’s not even just being “fine” thats actively encouraging it) and here the chickens are coming home to roost for her.

        ETA and also, its the fact that Carole so desperately wants to be accepted by this group that makes me have no pity for her. She wants them to forget that she was a flight attendant and a social climber and she had to work for her money and she doesn’t have a title etc etc. She desperately wants to be one of them. I think that’s why the Queen was okay with Michael – I don’t think he has that same desperation.

      • Sofia says:


      • Lorelei says:

        @Nic ITA. I’m Team No One after reading this article; I felt like that GIF of Larry David weighing his options. The comments about Carole are cruel and ridiculous (what’s wrong with “pleased to meet you?!” I’m a mere American peasant so idk all of these unwritten rules), but she was ridiculously cruel to Meghan, so I can’t feel too sorry for her.

      • Merricat says:


      • L84Tea says:

        100% agree.

      • Julia says:

        The classism in this story is GROSS.

        Frankly, I hope someone waltzes out of the Queen’s favorite bathroom and announces–loudly, publicly, preferably at the opening of the House of Lords–“WHOO BOY, YOU GOT A FANCY SH*TTER IN THERE, LADY!” That will teach ’em to give an aristocratic shudder at “toilet”.

      • BooyahB!itches says:

        @ Lorelei, it’s not classism, it’s just facts: no one who is raised in higher circles says “pleased to meet you,” it’s affected…same as calling napkins “serviettes,” and a thousand other examples. It’s a subtle but a huge tell. It is what it is, and Carole is failing. As she should. She’s a hard-faced beauty-pageant “mom.” God I hate that word, “mom.” Sorry America.

      • LMR says:

        And speaking of that crying story, let’s not forget the possibility that Kate lied to Wills about it, and he only learned the truth in the Oprah interview.

        So that, coupled with the funeral shenanigans, the Middleton press campaign, the Jill Biden fiasco, and the statue lobbying could have compounded Wills’ irritation at his wife past the point of no return.

        Believe me, once you realize you don’t want to spend the rest of your life in a marriage, the sweet freedom of divorce cannot come swiftly enough.

      • notasugarhere says:

        LMR, William wouldn’t care who made whom cry. He doesn’t care about Kate, he wanted Meghan gone.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Right @ notasugarhere. Since Meghan said in the Oprah interview that everyone knew (within the system is what she inferred) the real story-William wasn’t mislead by Kate. There’s zero chance William didn’t know the real story.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        What Meghan implied not inferred.

    • Delphine says:

      The people who come off really badly in this article are William and his friends. How truly petty and snobbish they are. Imagine looking down on someone because they worked as a stewardess when you’ve been handed everything on a silver platter your whole life.

      • Rnot says:

        Harry cut out friends when they were rude to his wife. William did not. Revealing isn’t it?

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        It is. And what fine upstanding aristo friends he & Kate have. I’m side eyeing the comment that ‘it’s believed William & Kate weren’t there’.

        If someone were to tell me I wasn’t ‘posh’. I would have to agree. I’ve never been a member of the Spice Girls.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They are quoting an old article from the 2007 breakup. The quotes from William’s ‘friends’ about doors to manual and all that? Those came from Carole’s PR hacks, not William’s friends. They were trying to get sympathy for Poor Middle Class Kate, William must take her back, etc. The past two editors of the Mail on Sunday have been Middleton PR consultants for twenty years. A former poster on here, LAK, bluhare, could quotes the names and dates of their employment.

    • A says:

      I do believe that Carole (and Kate, lbh) is “ghastly”, but I don’t believe it’s bc she’s a flight attendant, or bc she says “pardon”, chews gum, or any of the rest of it.

      I think she’s “ghastly” bc she and Kate behave in ways that are absolutely ghastly, and everyone around them can see that and they don’t like it. Even the aristocracy, with all of its snobbery and contempt for the lower classes, will in fact grudgingly respect you if you are, above all, a decent person.

      But when you act like a total d-ck, while having a major chip on your shoulder bc of your background, then yeah, people who don’t like you are going to pounce on that weakness and then exploit it.

      • Nic919 says:

        The origins of the Middleton family aren’t the issue here but their current actions toward other people, and specifically how they attacked Meghan in the media. Carole and Kate deserve even more criticism than they are getting because that crying story is evil to put out in the media and it helped form the unfair negative media narrative against Meghan that still exists today. So those two can just rot frankly.

  3. Esma says:

    I am clearly too middle class because I genuinely don’t understand why “pleased to meet you” is an issue? 😅 Or maybe because I’m American but I just found that part so weird.

    • Tom says:

      The Royals and their employees’ lack of manners is appalling. Genuine good manners include hospitality and kindness.

      Carole, you’re welcome at my place near Chicago. How do you like your burger? Beer or iced tea, girl? Hey, I’m fucking pleased to meet you, too!

      • Lorelei says:

        @Tom exactly. Isn’t the whole point of having good manners to graciously put other people at ease? The royals, as usual, have it ass-backwards.

      • Jaded says:

        As much as I think CarolE is a pushy, aggressive stage mother I too think she’d be a hoot to sit down with, drink a pail of margaritas and talk smack about the BRF.

      • My favorite story about that and I can’t remember where I read it or who it was, but it was a very famous hostess who at a dinner party when she noticed that her guest picked up the finger bowl and drank it (as he clearly did not know what it was), picked up her own and drank it too. True manners are about making others feel comfortable, they involve grace and graciousness and they are NEVER EVER about judging others or making them feel “less then”.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        The fingerbowl story comes from the White House as far as the articles I’ve found stated. They no longer use them, but did and if a guest drank from the saucer with fragrant petals or leaves they would look away, change the subject or also sip from it. It was absolutely all about making the guests comfortable.

      • Eleonora says:

        I read a former Dutch Queen did something like that as well.

        A guest used the wrong thing for something, so she picked it up and did the same (I think it was a dessert fork that was used for the meat or something like that).

        I read it in a book years ago and always remembered it was shown as the supreme example of true etiquette: make people feel at ease.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Letizia did that for someone re. putting a purse on the table after the first woman had done it. Didn’t want her embarrassed or called out for the behavior.

      • Kaykay says:

        love this, can I come too?

    • Becks1 says:

      Okay now I’m just thinking of the bit from My Fair Lady. “HOW do you do?”

    • MerlinsMom1018 says:

      Guess that would definitely ice me out because I tend to say “nice to meet you” thereby showing my apparent lower class upbringing. Ah well, there goes MY social climbing attempt😎

      • megs283 says:

        Right?? This reflects poorly on the royals (per usual).

      • cassandra says:

        Seriously, I thought I was passing as Middle Class at least haha

      • Lady D says:

        I just found out I’m high class because I actually use how do you do a lot when meeting someone new. I had no idea it made me classy.

      • Nick G says:

        @Laurelcanyoner I remember that story as the hostess being the Queen! But, I could be wrong because I am so old.

    • Roo says:

      Simone, why is that more appropriate than saying “pleased to meet you”? Genuinely asking as my middle class American self does not understand.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      That was small compared to the other stories at the time that came out. Carole chewing gum with her mouth open and Carole asking where the “toilet “ was.

      If we put everything into perspective though… Diana was drilled to know how to speak and act. Meghan had to seek this knowledge on her own and have many cram sessions learning a culture inside a culture she’s never lived. These women did it in very short And arguably unreasonable amounts of time. Kate and Carole has nearly a decade at this point and still never bothered to learn.

      I’ll argue Carole never wanted to fit in. She wanted others to bow to her.

      • swirlmamad says:

        She probably figured once her daughter got the ultimate prize — the ring — that she didn’t have to bother to make an effort to conform to the aristos’ way. She thought that once Kate married William it was a lock and it would be “different” for her family. Too bad she never really paid attention to how easily Charles ditched Diana once he finally decided he was done with her.

    • Eurydice says:

      So interesting – I suppose the point is that the person you’re meeting doesn’t care if you’re pleased or not. in my country/language of origin, “how do you do” would sound casual and presumptuous when meeting a stranger – kind of like “Hey, how you doin’?”. “It is/was a pleasure to meet you” would be more polite.

    • Betsy says:

      @Roo – the way Miss Manners explains it is how could you know if you’re pleased to meet someone if you only just met them? Hence the, “how do you do/how are you?”

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      The explanation I heard is that you never say “pleased to meet you” to the queen because *of course* you, a mere peasant, will be pleased to meet the queen. It’s a given. To say so implies that it might be conceivable that maybe, possibly, you wouldn’t be pleased to meet her Gloriousness, or that you have a say in how you feel. Oh the horror!

    • EMF999 says:

      When I lived in England, I worked for a stockbrokers. Really high class; one of the Queen’s cousins worked there. I learned to never ever say “Pardon” but rather “What?”.
      They refer to all of these class things as “U” and “Non U”. It is quite quite awful and I cannot even imagine how bad it is in Royal circles.
      I almost felt sorry for Kate for a second – note I said “almost”.

      • Amy T says:

        I’m on a phone or would find a link, but Nancy Mitford wrote a classic essay on this very topic. Worth reading.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Go figure, and here l thought saying “what” was rude, classless American that l am.🙄 Maybe saying “Wazzup” would put a different spin on it.

      • Emily H says:

        Thanks for the tip, Amy T! I found the article – interesting:

      • Lorelei says:

        “What” comes across to me as less “posh” than “pardon,” and I don’t think I’ve ever said “how do you do?” in my life, so I guess I’m pure gutter trash according to these people, lol.

      • Courtney B says:

        It reminds me of the Dowager Countess on Downton Abbey. When non-titled, middle class Matthew and his mother Isabel are introduced to her following his elevation to heir, Isabel says to her to call her Isabel and what she she call Violet. Violet replies ‘Dowager Countess’. It’s so snobby but Maggie Smith’s delivery always kills me.

      • h-barista says:

        Is it because ‘Pardon’ is of French origin?

        (Shades of Monty Python and the Holy Grail)

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Becks, thinking of that too. “Move your bloomin’ arse!”

      Carole to Elizabeth: “Pleased to meetcha, your worship, but where’s the terlet?”

    • Lucy says:

      There’s also a whole thing called “U terms” that was documented starting in the 1930s maybe? U terms are things that only the true upperclass know to say. I’m going to screw it up because I’m not looking at the list right now, but it’s things like napkin vs serviette (I don’t remember which one is right). Just total insider handshakes.

    • Chicago says:

      There’s a video on YouTube discussing exactly this. Apparently, depending on class people use different words for the same thing. The English seem to be really into that.

      • Leanne says:

        And here (as an American) I just thought that if you use a variety of words to convey your thoughts, beliefs, and feelings you were educated and had a large vocabulary. Silly me! I should have know there is only one proper way to say something.

    • Lorelei says:

      There are some Americans who enjoy making themselves feel superior using language, too — there was a joke on Gilmore Girls once about something similar. Emily Gilmore (a known snob for those who didn’t watch the show; old-money, Connecticut WASPY type) once said,
      “You congratulate the groom. You offer the bride best wishes.” just to make another character feel moronic because I assume he’d just congratulated a bride.

      Btw I had to Google because I couldn’t remember the quote, and found it in this hilarious article. I’d forgotten how funny Emily Gilmore was!

    • @Lucy

      U and Non-U was a term that Nancy Mitford picked up from a linguist (?) and took to write and article about. It even had a glossary of terms. I can’t remember all of them, but I remember “looking glass vs mirror” “Napkin vs Serviette” and “Scent for perfume”. It was (And clearly still is!) yet another code that that U (Upperclass) have that the middle class (non-u) just don’t know, and it’s yet another barrier to joining them. AND yet another thing they can judge you for.

      I went to lunch when I was in my early twenties with a real dragon of an English upper L Lady and while I was warned that she was pretty ghastly, nothing prepared me for her giving me instructions THE ENTIRE MEAL. “Now, LaurelCanyoner, I am sure you just don’t know but you want to be using THAT fork”, and “Now, LaurelCanyoner, you must pass that to your husband RIGHT AWAY, but I’m sure you don’t do things like that in America”.

      Seriously, character out of a Jane Austen novel. And the funny thing is that she was a “made” lady not a “born” lady and she should have known better, but CLEARLY was all there for that life. Thankfully it just made me laugh, but after spending a bit of time in that world, you just want nothing to do with it. Grim, joyless, chinless wonders, who still think they live in an Empire and still talk about us as rude, rough, colonials. It’s a club I wouldn’t join for all the money in the world, and it’s always made me FEEL for Meghan as these people fetishsize being superior and you will NEVER even be treated politely by many of them. They just sneer.

    • Eurydice says:

      @Lorelei – I think the idea behind the bride/groom thing was that congratulating the bride would sound like she bagged her prey.

    • BooyahB!itches says:

      @Simone, it’s a lot more subtle than that in UC circles when speaking with MC intruders. You’re right about never “announcing” oneself to the Queen (“pleased to meet you”), nor can you offer a greeting that forces her to respond (“how do you do?”). It’s as high class as it gets to say “Hello, Ma’am,” and drop a slight curtsey 🙂 Also, it’s napkin, not serviette; and never “pardon?”, just “what?”

    • notasugarhere says:

      @Becks1. How KIND of you to let me come.

    • Roslyn says:

      I’m quite sure I have seen a video clip of Princess Anne in which she says “I’m pleased to meet you” to people who are being introduced to her.

    • Kaykay says:

      I’m no “aristocat” but I gasped at the ” Carole chewing gum at the first event she was invited to attend” part. Wow. That is unfit.

  4. Merricat says:


  5. Mac says:

    Can someone explain why “pleased to meet you” is “middle class”? That’s considered polite in the US.

    • Jessie Quinton says:

      It’s not the proper greeting used by Royals — someone obviously didn’t read the manual before meeting Q.E.

    • TrixC says:

      Posh people would say “how do you do”. And lavatory instead of toilet.

    • Prairiegirl says:

      Snobbery. If you’re a Royal or an aristocrat, you aren’t necessarily “pleased” to meet someone who’s a cobbler or a ditch digger. But then I wouldn’t be pleased to meet, say, Woody Allen so maybe “how do you do” is the way to go. 🤔

      • Cessily says:

        That is how I seemed to me, a lower class person would be “pleased” to meet a Royal or an aristocratic but a Royal or an aristocratic are not “pleased” when meeting people of common birth. The fact that we are in 2021 and there are people that are that nitpicky over a greeting is ridiculous..

    • EllenOlenska says:

      I linked to an article further down that goes into,the whole history of upper class and non upper class words…

    • Betsy says:

      No, it’s not actually.

      • Becks1 says:

        What’s not? pleased to meet you is definitely polite in the US. It’s used all the time.

      • Sid says:

        Becks, it’s considered polite to the average American. But if you are looking for whatever the U.S equivalent of British aristos would say, then I guess that would be whatever the New England-Mid Atlantic WASPs would say.

  6. Steph says:

    That older pic with the thin eyebrows. My niece calls them 90’s eyebrows and always makes fun of me and my sister when she sees pics of us when we were younger.

    So Carole is a social climber. Yeah, we been knew that.

    • Jennifer says:

      I blame Kate Moss.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      That trend KILLED my eyebrows. They’ve *never* come back from it 😱

      • swirlmamad says:

        Same. Between slaughtering them with the tweezers back in the day and natural aging, I have to pencil them in every day now and I’m so over it.

      • Cessily says:

        Same here.. Personally it is a lesson in peer pressure that has stayed with me throughout my life.

      • (The OG) Jan90067 says:

        Even pencil is getting harder to fake it with lol. Wish I knew of a great micro-feather blader in my area. I know there are *tons* here, but I want to find a *really* good one to trust that to!

      • Jaded says:

        @(The OG) Jan90067 — I’ve been using a product called Liaison Lash Bond and Eyebrow Bond and my lashes and eyebrows are back!! I highly recommend it and it won’t break the bank.

      • Monica says:

        Youngsters, I lost my eyebrows in the Seventies!

    • Lorelei says:

      Those eyebrows…still make me cringe just thinking about them. Kaiser really outdid herself with the photos on this one; I was laughing so hard it took me a moment to be able to focus and actually read the post. I was like “HOW does she always find these?!” These two of Carole are fabulous.

      At first, I thought the one of her getting out of the car was one of her daughters, because that’s *exactly* how they both looked and dressed in all of those 2007-era photos.

      • Isabella says:

        I did worse. I grew out my eyebrows during the Brooke Shields era. Then I over-plucked them. Terrible ideas.

        Weird to see that Kate was addicted to buttons way back when. That white coat is cute, though.

  7. Scorpion says:

    Oh dear, nature abhors a vacuum. The Cambridges shot themselves in the foot. With the absence of the Sussexes, the full spotlight is fully on them, good and bad news will be reported. The rehashing of articles over a decade old is very interesting. I’d feel sorry for Carole but I’m sure she contributed to the smear campaign against the Sussexes. Funny how we are no longer getting daily articles about how Kate is the monarch’s saviour etc….

    • Snuffles says:

      Yup. Sounds like the RRs are gearing up to tear the Middletons apart.

    • Merricat says:

      Couldn’t happen to a nicer family.

    • Betsy says:

      You’re right; they did away with the competition and now here they – Kate, William, Carole – are. Alone. Exposed. All in different ways – if the Middletons’ money actually comes from crimes committed by the dodgy uncle, that’s one exposure. William really loving someone else is another. Alleged problems with William are another. Kate being boring and dumb is, I guess another but presents no real problems.

  8. Jane says:

    Whenever I read stuff like this, I roll my eyes. Perhaps it’s because I’m lower middle class from a working class background, but I honestly don’t see what’s wrong with any of the stuff Carol has supposedly said. They all seem perfectly polite utterances to me. And since the reporters never explain why saying ‘toilet’ or ‘pardon’ is offensive (would ‘bog’ or ‘what?’ be better?), it’s just nasty snobbish gatekeeping. I mean, sure, criticise Carol for raising a workshy doormat daughter, but for saying words that seem perfectly respectable? Whatever.

    • SarahCS says:

      Nothing. Absolutely nothing. These are snobs who re-write the rules of what is acceptable to suit themselves or do the ‘oh don’t you know that since the time of so and so the 12th it’s considered totally unacceptable to brush ones teeth with the right hand’ in as condescending tone as possible. I hate them.

    • Becks1 says:

      It is absolutely nasty snobbish gatekeeping, I think we all know that we can criticize the Middletons for plenty but saying “pleased to meet you” over “hello” doesnt seem to be a valid thing to criticize, lol. But that’s what’s interesting about this article. It just reminds me of the Tatler article from last year – “you thought we accepted you, haha, that’s cute, we remember your roots, you are not one of us and never will be.”

      It’s snobbish and classist but its sending a message to the middletons.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        ITA its snobbish and classist to criticise them for using terms that are actually perfectly normal to use – however I think its used to remind the Middleton’s that no matter how hard they try they will never be aristo’s and everyone knows that is what they all so desperately want to be.

        I have worked with real aristo’s and for the most part they were down to earth people, what they don’t like is people pretending to be something they are not esp when those people want to impress them/show off that just cause they have money they can be aristo’s too.

    • Nic919 says:

      Yes all of this is totally snobby, but Carole desperately wants to be a part of that group regardless and she has herself attacked Meghan for having a work ethic in interviews so I stopped caring about any criticism of Carole because she’s not any better than them. Plus she threw her daughters at aristos and let them degrade themselves for years until one of them caught a prize. That it ends up not being exactly what they expected it to be is on them and their completely skewed values.

    • Over it says:

      Carole should have said when she met the queen, what’s up Betty? Lol.
      Raising your daughter to be a royal doormat is the bigger offense in my book , but what do I know. I am but a mere peasant

      • Miranda says:

        “What’s up, Betty? Where’s the shitter?” is exactly what I’m going to say when I meet the Queen.

      • Lorelei says:

        Oh my god Miranda, I legit just screamed at “where’s the shitter, Betty?” 😭

    • Betsy says:

      I don’t think they actually care about the petty gatekeeping stuff, I think they just don’t like the Middletons.

    • Mia says:

      @Jane, I agree. I also roll my eyes. There is nothing wrong with anything she said. But to be honest, Carole buys into the narrative that these people are superior. Anyone looking to marry into these upper classes and circles and acting like ‘they’ve made it’ obviously buys into the idea that these people are the better half. Anyone thinking the Queen deserves all these bows and courtesies obviously buy into this and many will defend it to the death as ‘tradition’. And oddly, some of these people also think it is only the aristos who are the snobs and that the royals at somehow deserve all the fawning.

      The fact that people gatekeep the social classes they were born into (if they are on the top) is as old as dirt. I believe a lot of the ‘posh’ sounding English words are also derived from the Normans right? At one point royalty and some aristocrat’s dominant language was Norman French over English or am I wrong?

      I would never bow to that miscreant Queen or her family which sanctioned the slaughtering of the indigenous of my parent’s country and then brought my parent’s ancestors over as slaves and indentured servants. They are the high classed people? Please. They only have the resources they gatekeep so hard because they have had centuries of practice first exploiting and colonizing Wales, Ireland, Scotland, before branching out.

      The fact that Carole thinks the royals and aristos are the better half is actually the sad thing. My mom always said to me that people can only make you feel bad about yourself if you let them. If you buy into the idea that other people are always superior and play all the games they ask of you, that is the choice you make. You can always try not to play into the games or give any more legitimacy to their power systems by looking to join them. Create something of value and look for pride in those who are denied basic necessities and opportunities due merely to the chance of birth.

      • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

        Yeah, the Middletons are awful, but the jumped-up arrogant dullards feeling entitled to be the arbiters of what’s acceptable and sneering at everybody else for not having an ancestor who was a crawly suck-up to Henry VIII or for saying ‘pleased to meet you’ are even more objectionable and vile.

    • Isabella says:

      Also what’s wrong with having a job? What the hell do these aristos do all day long.

      Prince William’s friends would “ridicule” Carole’s former career as an air stewardess, as reported in The Mirror

      • Mia says:

        Having a job is apparently considered ‘low’ because putting in the work to make your own money and not having other people make it for you as ‘the common peasants’ are supposed to do is unthinkable.

    • A says:

      Honestly, there’s a lot of heat over word-related debates, but at least those debates often tend to be about things like calling Sprite “lemonade”, and whether you use “soda” or “pop” or “carbonated beverage” when asking for a diet Coke or w/e. They’re not things that are indicative of centuries-old class and economic status/privileges that are still upheld to this day.

      At least calling Sprite “lemonade” can’t be used as an indicator of how likely it is you’ll be PM of the UK one day, whereas saying “Pardon” instead of “Sorry, what?” actually is.

  9. Merricat says:

    Lol that “pardon” is considered middle-class.

    • Jessica says:

      In The Crown, Princess Margaret threw a fit when Margaret Thatcher dared to utter the words, “I beg your pardon”. Ranted at her for being “common” — the epitome of high class behavior. 🙄🙄🙄

      • Talie says:

        @Jessica – that was the first thing I thought of. I’m like, I’ve heard this somewhere before…I guess this is really how those aristos think, even 30 yrs later. lol

      • Merricat says:

        It’s so revealing, this strength of negative feeling about a word that represents humility and accountability.

    • betsyh says:

      In “Bridget Jones’s Diary,” Bridget’s mother is always saying “Don’t say ‘what’ darling, say ‘pardon’!” So what ARE you supposed to say instead?

      • megs283 says:

        INTERESTING! So I guess that was one more way that Helen Fielding was showing the hopelessness of Bridget’s mom?

      • mynameispearl says:

        Bridget Jones was the epitome of middle class though so that fits. Middle class in England is sort of posh anyway! It’s just not posh-posh like upper class and aristocracy. But to someone working class like me, middle class is considered posh.

      • Nick G says:

        “BBC Radio 4 – Seriously…, Seriously… – Ten words that prove you aren’t posh”

        Number 10 is “avoid Americanisms at all cost ”

      • megs283 says:

        @Nick G, that list is a nightmare! So tricky – some “u” words are fancy, others are the basic terms, and God help the non-u who is trying to pass. Glad I don’t have to worry. 🙂

      • Nick G says:

        @megs right? Meghan is well rid of these clowns.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Nick, seriously, I’m imagining poor Meghan being expected to remember all of this idiotic BS at all times and how the greeting is different depending on who she’s meeting, etc. Absolute nightmare! She’s far better off now.

      • UnionSnack says:

        @Nick G
        Thanks for the link. I cackled. To mention Blackberry (as a phone) in 2017… Was he speaking right from the 2005?

      • betsyh says:

        Upper class folks don’t drink “faffy” drinks like lattes? Sigh. How depressing that they must put cold milk in their coffee.

      • betsyh says:

        Megs283 and mynameispearl: Fascinating, I love this book series and this is some humor that I missed.

      • Monica says:

        I realized recently that I often say, “Say again?” Now that’s high class!

  10. Jessica says:

    Carole reminds me of Kris Jenner but the classism of this article is beyond nauseating. “Pleased to meet you” — how dreadful! Utterly tedious, boring, provincial snobs.

    • Jenn says:

      Carole wishes she was Kris Jenner.

    • swirlmamad says:

      As ridiculous and problematic as Kris Jenner can be, at the very least she has supported and coached her daughters to have a head for business and actually work for what they want (even if their beginnings were questionable). WTF has Carole done besides push her daughters to marry for money and status? She certainly never taught them any kind of work ethic which really makes me question the legitimacy and “success” of Party Pieces. Wouldn’t a self-made millionaire naturally want to pass on those values to their children?

      • HeyJude says:

        If their beginnings were questionable?!

        C’mon now. They sell harmful things and ideas to impressible young people currently.

        Diuretic teas/cleanses, injurious corsets for “waste training”, enhanced photography that presents fake unattainable looks regular people will never replicate, then there’s whole butchering of a generation of young women trying to copy their body dysphoric, plastic surgery obsessed comically exaggerated noses, boobs, and backsides.

        They are current questionable.

      • swirlmamad says:

        True, and I probably should have been more clear that I absolutely do NOT think the Kardashians/Jenners are upstanding models to be revered. There is plenty of things they have done and endorsed that are highly problematic and still currently do. I more meant to state the fact that at the VERY least, they do not shy away from working and literally hide out and make a sport out of laziness, while burning through money that they did absolutely nothing to earn. That would be Kate to a T.

  11. SarahCS says:

    As I read it his snobby posh friends still haven’t accepted her. In spite of the ridiculous voice she does these days.

    As for ‘pleased to meet you’ and the rest just UGH. If anything shows you how awful the gatekeeping is around this hallowed ‘institution’ of titles and nonsense is it’s right there. I have no love for the Middletons and their dodgy dealing and smear campaigns but they are helping shine a light on how awful these people are.

  12. Maria says:

    I don’t think any of the actual words she said were the issue to them. This is like the Meghan-wearing-dark-nail-polish thing. The tabloids hated Meghan because of their racism, not her black nail polish, but nitpicked on things like that to emphasize their dislike.
    What they did have an issue with was Carole’s rampant social climbing and thirst. But I guess they couldn’t really expound on that beyond hints (unlike their hatred of Meghan) because it would be too risky given that it wasn’t clear if William was going to marry Kate or no.
    I think they’re just recycling it because there’s no news…and the Sussex material is more or less exhausted at the moment.

  13. Jay says:

    Out of curiosity, what would the “acceptable” term for toilet be? Do British upper crust people use a ridiculous euphemism, or is it an affectation to say toilet when you mean “loo”? I’m dying to know!

    @Becks, I’m right there with you that this particular story is no coincidence. I think someone wanted to remind the meddling Middletons that they better stop with this lynchpin nonsense and get back to being grateful peasants.

    • Jessie Quinton says:

      What they say is “loo” or “lavatory”.

      “Pardon” is like a curse word, you should say “Sorry, what”?

      They don’t say “Living room” or “Lounge”, they say “drawing room” or “sitting room”.

      They don’t say “Perfume” they say “Scent”.

      (Mother in law used to work for Duke of Northumberland a long time ago, I just had to ring and ask her LOL).

      • Jay says:

        Thanks so much for getting the scoop for me! Now I’m ready to infiltrate the upper crust, lol!

      • Jaded says:

        And you can never refer to your rear end as your “fanny”. In the UK fanny is slang for a woman’s private bits.

      • UnionSnack says:

        Oh, ladies, thank you so much! As far as I am not native english speaker I am so glad to learn something new!

    • TrixC says:

      They would say lavatory.

    • Malificent says:

      I work for a UK-based company, and have a lot of British co-workers in our office. I will say that hearing “toilet” in public took some getting used to. As an American, “toilet” sounds very blunt. We might use it at home with our families, but in public we say “restroom” or “bathroom”.

      • faithmobile says:

        I don’t know anyone who says toilet. Regardless of being British or American it does sound gross.

      • Feeshalori says:

        I usually ask for the restroom, however the aristos may look down on that term thinking you’re referring to the bedroom.

      • SarahCS says:

        I’m British and when I started travelling to the US for work I did try and remember a few things to avoid confusion, ‘restroom’ instead of toilets/loos was definitely one of them. Particularly as I was travelling round a lot of different offices and needed to ask the question on a pretty much daily basis. I think it was being on holiday (sorry, vacation) in Vegas some years before and asking a hotel receptionist where the lifts were and we stared blankly at each other until I almost shouted ‘ELEVATORS’ that put it on my radar.

      • Malificent says:

        When dialects are almost, but not quite, the same, it’s easy to forget the few terms or usages that are different. My favorite was years ago when I worked at another company, and a British co-worker whom I was very friendly with, offered to “knock me up” when he got to town. We had a good laugh when I explained that he had just offered to get me pregnant.

      • fluffy_bunny says:

        I worked at company that called the bathrooms water closets and they were labelled that way. I think the founder had be abroad and discovered the term and decided it was a politer way of putting it. The founder’s chef was a family friend and he liked his jet to be stocked with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches so he was apparently quirky.

      • SpankyB says:

        I used to work for an industrial property management company and one of the managers insisted on calling them “toilets” instead of restroom or bathroom. His reasoning was that there isn’t a bathtub therefor it’s not a bathroom. And you don’t rest in there so it’s not a restroom. I told him I rest while I sit so I’m calling it a restroom.

        I never got used to him saying toilet.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Malificent ITA! I always say either bathroom or restroom, and if I was at a fancy restaurant or something I’d probably ask where the ladies’ room is. But never toilet! That just sounds strange coming from anyone, imo.

        At the end of the day, it’s all so meaningless. It’s just a way these people allow them to perceive themselves as “better” than others.

      • Rnot says:

        In my part of America the word toilet almost always refers to the actual porcelain fixture not the room. I’ve heard: bathroom, restroom, washroom, the facilities, men’s room/ladies’ room, and very occasionally lavatory. The terms loo or water closet would get you a blank look around here.

      • Nick G says:

        Harry says “bathroom” in the James Corden bit, but he’s travelled a lot obvs.

      • betsyh says:

        Malificent: Haha!

      • Calibration says:

        In Australia most people say toilet or loo, sometimes bathroom on a private house where it may indeed be one. In restaurants signs mostly read toilet. And lav is a toilet not the room. it appears between that and pardon, they simply don’t like French derived words.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Malificent, that’s a really funny story. Before you explained, did you say no, thank you for the offer?

        @Rnot, same here. Sometimes the reading room is used because a lot of men will go in there with a newspaper.

      • LynnInTx says:

        Reading all of these is amusing and fascinating to me. Down in the south, my (older) family members refers to the “toilet” as the “powder room.” And when they need to go, they say they need to go “powder their nose” (touch up their makeup) because everyone knows real southern ladies don’t have bodily functions. LOL My immediate family refers to it as the restroom or bathroom.

      • SomeChick says:

        you should always ring someone up first, to ask if it’s ok to knock them up!

    • JanetDR says:

      This discussion is taking me back to grade school when a new student asked to go to the lavatory. The teacher appeared amused and explained to him that the term we used was “basement”. Which must has been confusing to him since the place he was looking for was just down the hall! The toilets must have been in the basement at some point?
      Maybe it would be easier to announce (a la Robert Munsch) I have to go pee! Right now! 😂

      • Lorelei says:

        BASEMENT?? I have heard all of the other words in this thread used instead of toilet, but never basement! That’s wild. The poor kid must have been so confused, lol.

      • Gubbinal says:

        I am very old. I went to the local “public school” in the USA (for ages 5-14 or so, K-8). The toilets were in the basement. The teachers all required that we say “the basement” instead of the many other possibilities. One of them explained that “basement” was not a word associated with bodily processes. The name of the school, btw, was The Hooker School (not kidding at all–it still stands)

        Also the “basement” had a few offices and the auditorium–which made the meaning murkier.

      • JanetDR says:

        Haha! There is a local family named Hooker and they used to have a variety of businesses with that name. Hooker Storage, Hooker Limo, Hooker Homes. They are good people and as they say, it’s their name!
        I’m glad it wasn’t just us with “basement” it never seemed odd to me until I saw the look on that boy’s face.

  14. Amy Bee says:

    The royals are on holiday so these old stories and quotes are being repackaged as new pieces. As for Kate and her family being accepted by the aristos, last year’s Tatler piece showed that is still not the case. Kate probably lives a very isolated life and it will likely get worse the higher she moves in society.

    • Lady D says:

      She will always have the hanger-ons surrounding her. People who want to feel powerful or important will always flock towards her. It may not be the people she wants fawning over her, (lol) but she will always get attention because of her position in the RF.

  15. India says:

    Carole is a major piece of work. She connived and pushed for Willy to marry her daughter. There is nothing nice about her. I expect Willy has finally woken up and seen the light about all things Middleton and has turned the wolves on her now.

  16. Digital Unicorn says:

    It is very interesting that this story has been rehashed – tells me that the Mids no longer have The Other Brother’s press protection, as for many years writing negative stories about the Middletons was off limits.

    The Middleton’s and Kate are being setup to take ALL the sh!t over briefing the media against the Sussex’s. It also means the wannabe Dowager Queen Mother Carole no longer has any influence over Cain and the Cambridge marriage. At the very least I think the Cambridges have separated and will divorce eventually when Cain has someone else lined up, someone who can compete with Meghan.

    • Snuffles says:

      “ The Middleton’s and Kate are being setup to take ALL the sh!t over briefing the media against the Sussex’s.”

      And we all said this is what would happen last year. And I have no doubt they played a huge part in it but they weren’t the only ones and William probably encouraged it. Now that it’s all backfiring it’s time to offer up a new sacrificial lamb. And I have ZERO sympathy.

      • Nic919 says:

        Same here. She hasn’t been passive in the smear campaign against Meghan so this is all earned karma.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Agreed, Nic919. The Middletons have been active players against Meghan for 4+ years. They’ve earned the take down.

    • Steph says:

      Will’s lack of intelligence, ambition, compassion and charisma will never allow him to attract someone who can compete with Meghan. There are also no perks left to make marrying a ffk worth it. They wouldn’t enjoy the status of queen or mother of the monarch.

      • Dilettante says:

        Yes, who would want him??

      • Lorelei says:

        I cannot imagine any sane woman signing up to marry William after seeing how royal brides are treated. No tiara is worth that level of scrutiny, imo.

    • Jaded says:

      I came here to say that exact same thing. This is a deliberate rehash of all the reasons why Kate was an unsuitable choice back then and now that their marriage is on the rocks it’s obvious that taking down the Midds via the tabloids puts William one step closer to having their separation/divorce made public.

    • nina says:

      He will never have someone who can compete with Meghan because she will have to comply with the palace protocol and never outshine the heir.
      To compete with Meghan she will of necessity have to outshine PWT. He is just tired of Keen and wants newer model. Someone his aristo friends won’t make fun of.

  17. Lili says:

    i keep reading on twitter that the cambridges are scrubbing stories that don’t show them in a good light off the net, so i guess some reporters are putting certain stories back. maybe its a warning i dont know

  18. Sofia says:

    It definitely is being snobbish and classist towards Carole. Don’t care for the woman but classism isn’t right. And Kate still isn’t accepted if that Tatler cover told us anything. That being said, this is the life Carole worked so hard for. She has spent 20+ years and counting for her and her family to be accepted yet still nothing. I know this is talking about 2007 but I doubt feelings/opinions towards the Midds have dramatically changed. Once again, classism isn’t right but these are the people who’s class Carole aspires to be fully accepted as.

    • Lizzie says:

      I just wonder why TOB’s friends didn’t made fun of Michael Middleton for having a job as they did his wife?

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        I guess it’s because Michael was a *pilot*, CarolE an *air hostess* (ie: flying “waitress”) so not a “professional” skill.

      • Sofia says:

        I imagine there is some sexism in play there but also that Michael isn’t thirsty or desperate to be accepted by the aristos. Plus I think he has /some/ (albeit very distant) aristo connections so that may have helped a bit.

      • Courtney B says:

        Sexism but also because Michael is basically invisible. Most people couldn’t spot him in a crowd and I don’t think he’s ever given an interview or statement?

      • Kalana says:

        Michael wasn’t a pilot. He and Carole were both flight attendants and then Michael became a flight dispatcher.

      • Q says:

        Michael was not a pilot and has no aristo background.

    • UnionSnack says:

      I have very mixed feelings about this article. On the one hand – yes, classism is unacceptable, moreover aristo set is not the epitome of dignity. And there is nothing wrong with being air steward or doctor or etc.

      But on the other hand Kate was through all this “jibs” while dating w William. They both – Carole and Kate – knew they are unacceptable, they both saw how vile and vindictive aristos are. I don’t know what others would do but if I was in K”s and C’s shoes I would rather go away. No title, no crown and no money cost your mental welfare. I guess Carole thought that right after the wedding they’ll be accepted – but no. Now they are waiting while Kate is queen and maybe then…. But still no.

      • Sofia says:

        I agree. Kate and her family kept silent about all of this because as I said, they were desperate to be part and accepted as one of the aristos. And as others have said, she had no problem putting down Meghan and she has no problem looking down on other middle class folks so my sympathy extends to classism being bad in general but that’s it.

    • Nic919 says:

      I can’t feel bad for regurgitated classicism stories when there are more recent examples of Carole and her brother Gary openly trashing Meghan. They are adding racism to the mix as well.

  19. Elle says:

    I hope I can post this here from the very highly recommended “Watching the English,” by anthropologist Kate Fox:
    “Pardon This word is the most notorious pet hate of the upper and upper-middle classes. Jilly Cooper recalls overhearing her son telling a friend ‘Mummy says that “pardon” is a much worse word than “fuck”.’ He was quite right: to the uppers and upper-middles, using such an unmistakably lower-class term is worse than swearing. Some even refer to lower-middle-class suburbs as ‘Pardonia’. Here is a good class-test you can try: when talking to an English person, deliberately say something too quietly for them to hear you properly. A lower-middle or middle-middle person will say, ‘Pardon?’; an upper-middle will say ‘Sorry?’ (or perhaps ‘Sorry – what?’ or ‘What – sorry?’); but an upper-class and a working-class person will both just say, ‘What?’ The working-class person may drop the t – ‘Wha’?’ – but this will be the only difference. Some upper-working-class people with middle-class aspirations might say ‘pardon’, in a misguided attempt to sound ‘posh’.”

    • Margles says:

      What a loathsome group of people the upper class are.

      • Elle says:

        As an Australian, it’s really hard for me to reconcile the English class system. It’s amazing that its still an entrenched way of life.

    • Darla says:

      What if you say “I can’t hear you get the marbles out of your mouth”?

    • A says:

      Jilly Cooper’s books are the weirdest and simultaneously the most revealing reading material when it comes to understanding British upper class society and how it functions. All of it is full of the weirdest, most garbage people, but they’re also simultaneously some of the most pathetic too. It’s so f-cking weird.

      Anyway, I don’t understand wtf they have against the word, “Pardon.” I was always told to not say, “What?” bc it’s rude and entitled. Pardon is much more polite, and it at least conveys the impression that you were *trying* to listen, and just didn’t catch what they said. “What” makes it seem like you weren’t paying attention at all. I guess listening when other people are talking is just something that’s middle-class now.

  20. Margles says:

    These “criticisms” mostly make me feel sorry for Carol and reinforce the sense that the UK is a classist cesspool. Who cares if the poor woman says, “Pleased to meet you”?

    • Cee says:

      Yeah, no. She used the same snobbery and classism with an added spark of racism to bully Meghan. Kate did the same. I’m not sorry for them one bit.

      • Margles says:

        Oh I think they were thrilled because they knew snobbery combined with racism trumps just snobbery and were thrilled to be able to direct the abuse elsewhere. It’s the classic bullied kid who becomes an even worse bully as soon as they have the chance to sit with the popular kids. But it doesn’t change my opinion that this article was mean, petty, and gross.

      • Yasmine says:

        @Cee Exactly. They used this same classism AND added racism to the mix to harm Meghan. We definitely should have conversations about how classism in the UK is messed up, but the Middletons don’t deserve any sympathy or defending.

      • Nic919 says:

        Exactly. Carole is no better than any of the other snobs, she just happens to be lower on the food chain. That they are turning on her now that they can’t go after Meghan as much is her own problem. This is the game Carole and Kate wanted to play since the early 2000s and the chickens are coming home to roost.

      • Mia says:

        I honestly don’t think it is much of a surprise at all. I have found that white people from all classes can be very racist towards POC. But I notice with the working class, there is a history of making sure that people of other races (even if they have a higher socio-economic class/ good education, you know all the things that get higher class white people more respect) ‘know their place’. It is like they do the work for their richer counterparts. Reminds me of Lydon B. Johnson’s notorious quote.

    • Louisa says:

      Right? I know the article was supposed to be a knock at Carol but honestly it makes the royals look much worse. A bunch of insufferable bullies. And I wouldn’t be “pleased to meet” any of them.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Louisa, honestly, the only members of that loathsome family I’d be “pleased to meet” are Harry and Meghan. And maybe George.

    • Nic919 says:

      I will never feel bad for Carole once she decided to openly attack Meghan in one of her only interviews. No pity should ever be afforded to someone who is attacking others who are also not aristos.

  21. Mooney says:

    Honestly weird people and manners. But if my boyfriend, the one who I want to marry, makes fun of my humble upbringing AND specially my mother, I would break up with him. This really tells you about her self respect. Her fear was more being accepted by his upper crust circles and not true love as they like to claim.

    • Nic919 says:

      Kate was prepared to degrade herself in many ways in order to hold on to William. Tolerating the classicism is just one of those things. The non stop cheating should have been the breaking point but she has clung on.

    • February-Pisces says:

      If you’re boyf belittles you and makes fun of your upbringing, then they clearly don’t accept you for who you are. If you really loved someone then you wouldn’t dream of mocking them for being poorer than you, it wouldn’t even matter. If Willie was half the man of his brother, he would have defended Kate and Ma, but probably laughed along with his aristo mates.

  22. Maria says:

    Actually now that I’m revisiting this I’m having my own tinfoil hat moment.

    I’m not sure I believe these stories.
    Sophie’s father was middle-class and they reportedly liked him a lot.
    I’m wondering if these were OG Middleton leaks (they did this a LOT back in the day, through people like Niraj Tanna) trying to garner sympathy for the Middletons (it worked pretty well, and it’s working here) and that’s why they’re being rereleased.
    The RF is horribly classist obviously, but the victimization of Carole Middleton here and portraying her as this poor innocent middle-class mother seems a little….off.

    • Margles says:

      Doubtful. This is exactly the kind of nasty gatekeeping the UK upper class has deployed for years. Also, this wasn’t going to earn sympathy in 2007. This was going to earn nods from the DM readers who don’t like anyone who gets “above themselves.”

      • Maria says:

        I remember when these stories came out, and they did elicit some sympathy.
        Of course the RF gatekeeps and so do the upper classes. That’s not what I am disputing.
        I recall the comments from then being a mix.

      • Margles says:

        The comments on Megan were a mix too. It didn’t mean she was planting racist articles for sympathy. DM succeeds by catering to its readers’ worst prejudices. In 2007, that was attacked someone middle class for daring to want to rise higher. When Meghan came, it was heaping racist abuse on her. The DM is loathsome and reflects how loathsome it’s readership is.

      • Maria says:

        2007 was an extremely different time in royal reporting.

        The comments on Meghan were *never* a mix, btw. From the announcement of the engagement (and months before) they hated her, because of racism. That was an outright character assassination. They were outraged that Harry had the audacity to defend her publicly while they were dating. That was the first gauntlet that they took up and they never put it down. And the tabloids and readers were united in that. It is not comparable to Kate at all.

        But the reporting on Kate in 2007 was very different. First of all, she’s white, so she garnered sympathy anyway. Second of all, she leaked stories about herself through Tanna and others all the time, and still does, as we see. Third, the public still saw William as a poor kid traumatized by his mom’s death who needed a loving family (I guess the stans still do, but this image is not what it was in 2007). What happened in the Wars of the Waleses hadn’t yet faded to the (pre-Netflix Crown) lull that it did. People liked Kate as the university sweetheart. They made fun of her for waiting, but it was more tongue-in-cheek than malicious (with the exception of the News of the World phone hacking scandal, which is another conversation altogether, considering a great deal of scummy commenters coalesced there then).

    • Becks1 says:

      Hmmmm, interesting theory. So you think this is less “Carole never fit in, she was never one of us” and more “poor Carole, the royals were SO unwelcoming to her, they were SO classist and rude” etc. If so, then it still makes me think – why does Carole need to be seen as the victim at this point? What is going on behind the scenes that she wants to garner sympathy in the public eye?

      • Maria says:

        Yes. I mean, obviously I have no idea. But the fact that these articles always go out of their way to paint the Middletons as “rich” and “down-to-earth” and a “haven for William” next to the supposed crappy comments from the RF gives me pause.

      • The Hench says:

        The issue was and still is, as this article references, that Ma Middleton is a ghastly, pushy social climber. That’s why nobody likes her and why they use classist negativity to mock her because they know how much she aspires to be an aristo.

        They don’t extend the same criticism to Michael Middleton because he’s not pretending to be something he’s not – same with Sophie and her parents.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      @Maria It does seem off. It seems to me as an attempt to remind people that Kate & family had to endure bad headlines/stories too. That they toughed it out. There is no comparison to the horrific headlines/stories that Meghan(and Harry) have been subjected to.

      • Maria says:

        Yes. More Kate/Middleton victimization.

        I mean, even look at some of these comments. “I feel sorry for her!” (despite Carole’s targeting of Meghan) “Carole at least worked for her money!” No, she didn’t, lol.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I do believe when Carole worked as a flight attendant she did actually have to work. The Party Pieces stuff is questionable to me because I think Uncle Gary was heavily involved with Party Pieces being something else along with Uncle G’s $$$$$ getting Kate into St. Andrew’s and “coincidentally” the same residence hall as William.IIRC I don’t feel sorry for Carole. The other thing she worked hard at was getting Kate to cross paths with William and targeting of Meghan out of Momager mentality.

        As much as I believe it’s supposed to be a reminder OF ALL Kate endured also says subliminally sort of that the Middleton’s were a refuge for William FROM the royal family and the problematic structure of The Firm. Which, I cannot feel bad for him or Kate considering the smear campaign and false bullying allegations against Meghan. At this point, they have, what is probably a mocked up email fromcourtiers/William/Knauf to Case from imaginary staff complaints. If they really had anything of substance-it would have been leaked already. The Firm and all are worried about the receipts.

    • JanetDR says:

      @Maria but did Sophie’s father out on airs and pretend to be posh? I think it’s the pretense that puts people off.

      • Maria says:

        Yes, I think that’s a factor too.
        Not that middle-class pretension is any worse than upper-class pretension, but yes, I think that was something that played a role.

      • Nic919 says:

        Sophie’s father didn’t place her in Edward’s path like Carole did and he has stayed out of the media from day one. He didn’t pal around with Paul Dacre and other tabloid hacks and plant stories about Sophie either. (To be fair Sophie could handle that herself if needed). The main reason why we didn’t hear any stories being critical of Sophie’s father was because he didn’t court press attention or try to get the family freebies in the years they were dating.

        Carole has been aggressive in trying to get her daughter in the family and that’s most of the reaction here. The Middletons are obvious social climbers and they do nonsense like get signet rings and other silly things. If they weren’t so embarrassed about their own middle class and 8n Carole’s case working class origins, the snobs would have little ammunition. But Carole and Kate are so clearly desperate to belong.

      • JT says:

        @Maria @Nic19 I agree with the both of you. This “attack” on Kate’s middle class upbringing are definitely working regardless of whose agenda it is. Carole straight up had her brother attacking Meghan for months but people feel sorry for her now. They’ve been smearing Meghan for five years. Come on now. Carole and Kate chased this life for two decades, degrading themselves for any sort of acknowledgment from the upper classes, so I don’t see where this sympathy is coming from. If they weren’t so ashamed of their background they probably could’ve earned some begrudging respect from the aristos, but they are desperate to the core.

      • A says:

        @Nic919, really, so much of it is just the fact that Carole is sh-tty at her own PR. It’s tacky, it’s sloppy, it’s over the top, and not very well done at all. Compare it to someone like Sophie, who is exceptional at promoting herself in a way that you don’t even realize she’s doing it, or even Camilla, who also had a really good run until quite recently (she was a favourite with the royal rota for a reason), and it’s like…well no offence to the Midds or anyone who’s middle-class, but the jabs start to make a bit of sense.

        Carole’s attempts at promoting herself come off as extremely over-eager and indiscreet, and it is unpolished, and moreover, just so painfully insecure that you can feel it even from the most reheated article on this subject.

    • Courtney B says:

      Sophie’s father is VERY low key but also has (distant) aristo and artistic connections. It may have been enough to keep the wolves at bay. Fun fact: Paul Bettany is Sophie’s step cousin. Paul’s father Thane and Sophie’s father were stepbrothers.

  23. equality says:

    So the palace officials called Kate’s family names and we are supposed to believe that they were welcoming and helpful to Meghan and she was the one who abused them? Between this and the many leaks of names Meghan was called, they are outing themselves and too ignorant to realize it. Interesting that they put the home value and number of bedrooms in the article but we really need to know numbers of bathrooms.

  24. Susan says:

    These kinds of articles and re-hashes remind me….of how ridiculous these people are. Regardless of how I feel about the Middletons, to treat people this way—and repeatedly, I’ll add—is a kind of emotional manipulation I just can’t deal with. I’m very much a “f*&^ you, if you don’t treat me right, I will take my toys and go home.” I recognize that can be to my own detriment, but jeez, why let people treat you that way?? If I am not worthy, its their loss. What is wrong w the Middletons that they were willing to put up w this crap???

    • Sid says:

      I think Carole Middleton has a chip on her shoulder from growing up on a council estate in a working class family in a country where social class is still huge. Even having an allegedly successful business isn’t enough when you live in a country where no matter how rich you are the aristocratic class will still look down on you because you don’t have the right blood lines. Most normal people would tell those types to just eff off and then go about living a successful life. But if you’re ashamed of your background and/ or desperately want the acceptance of those you consider your “betters” then you will do whatever it takes I guess.

  25. taris says:

    i admire and respect any hard-working, self-making woman, but yeah, carole has had no chill for the last 20 years or so, since kate met william. i find some of the tabloid criticism of her a little snobbish at times, but honestly she can absolutely be gauche and inelegant.

    the tabloids are restless lately. you can just tell.
    the mirror and the express – more than the other rota papers – are always game to throw the royals under the bus once in a while. there’s nothing *new* in this ‘story’ here, but it is interesting they would put this out now. why?

    • Nic919 says:

      She openly criticized meghan in one of her only interviews. This goes beyond gauche and is simply nasty. Had she kept silent and not attacked her daughter’s sister in law then some sympathy might be warranted, but she’s played the game and if she gets burned by her “betters” then oh well.

      • swirlmamad says:

        Exactly. I could care less what the BM says about this witch. She earned alllllll of the smoke she’s getting now, so drink up, darlin’.

  26. Merricat says:

    Lol. Aristocratic blood is weak tea.

  27. Kitty says:

    I mixed and grew up around de upper classes, all very nice however l remember saying to a friend pre wedding that Kate will never be accepted in those circles, my dear old aunt agreed, l mean l suppose de heavy black eye etc didn’t help, but de fact is Carole is common, Kate apparently is nice enough, but even at parties and weddings with William ‘ She stopped going for a while , she was completely ignored , one time Will sat and flirted at de bar with Isabella C. while Kate sat there solo for de entire night., image de embarrassment of that.
    A few weeks back a commentator here said as soon as we see anti Kate and Middleton article’s we know something is up, l believe de Express had such article’s this week…… they did this with no push back from William!!

  28. EllenOlenska says:

    I will take Carole Middleton over the Queen any day. The Queen is still protecting Andy. The snobs want to downgrade Caroles background and slam her hustle and her drive (Something they also slammed Meghan for, remember the cookbook launch and email outrage?) She raised a very imperfect daughter but damn If she didn’t manage to outflank a ton of other mothers to landing that “prize” of PWT.

    Yes, Kate is the next person the press will feed to the wood chipper and they’ll keep Camilla as backup just in case they have to pivot, but while Carole has her limitations I have always admired the drive and wonder what most of her aristocratic critics would have accomplished starting in similar circumstances.

    • Maria says:

      Carole’s brother was involved in sex-trafficking and drug dealing and knocked out his wife in the street. He also financed a lot of Kate’s “snag William” campaign and Carole has always allied herself with him. I fail to see how he’s all that much better than Andrew.

    • A says:

      The one thing Camilla does actually have going for her is that she’s able to come off as if she’s pretty chill and capable of going with the flow, as it were.

      There’s a really great story actually, about how, a little after one of the interviews that either Charles or Diana gave, the press and the paparazzi were mobbed outside of her father’s house, where she’d gone to hide from the attention. One of them knocked on the door, and her father opened, and the tabloid journalist asked him for a quote. Her father said something along the lines of, “Absolutely not,” told them off for trampling over his garden or something, and then slammed the door shut.

      So I do think that Camilla, if nothing else, understands the premium on looking like she’s being discreet with the press, even if she historically hasn’t been (like…that story about her father made the rounds somehow, you know?) And she has far, FAR better instincts with the press and her own PR than Charles ever did, and that has worked in her favour in rehabbing her image in a big way.

  29. Margles says:

    This makes me think that besides their clear racism, one of the reasons they hated Meghan was she didn’t neatly fit into their nasty little class categories. She was American, went to a top school on her own merit, and made her money herself. But her speech and manners were all going to be American. They couldn’t put her in a neat little class box and she wasn’t going to be desperate to copy them . And I bet they hated that.

    • A says:

      I think the other thing that really worked against her is the smear campaign from the people within the monarchy and the staffers who worked for them. They really went out of their way to poison the f-cking well for Meghan in a huge way.

      Otherwise, Meghan is the sort of person who is actually pretty much right up their alley. She’s smart, accomplished, great at marketing and PR, glossy and professional and put together, incredibly polite, writes thank you notes, does calligraphy, etc. She’s even educated in a private school, and went to one of the best universities in the US. She’s the kind of person who, if she hadn’t married Harry, or wasn’t an actress, would have been the sort of professional who’d be in the pages of the Tatler on a semi-regular basis.

      But she never stood a chance, bc the powers-that-be at the palace, the people who work for the monarchy, and especially the staffers who work for William and Kate, the loathsome British tabloid press, etc., had it out for her from the start. It’s really reprehensible, how it all happened.

      • Margles says:

        Yeah, but my point was their reason for “having it out for her”, along with racism, was their classism and how they hated that Meghan couldn’t be slotted into their rigid class structures. They couldn’t sneer at her as middle class because she doesn’t act like a middle class UK person, but she wasn’t upper class (their kind) either. It made them angry. They don’t care about her earning her way into school. That’s a negative to them because the whole point of aristocracy is you get everything automatically due to birth. Not hard work.

      • A says:

        I’m not saying they don’t hate Meghan, or that they don’t look down at her for her background, or even for earning her way into school. What I’m saying is, outside of all the royal family stuff, Meghan has the same types of cultural interests that a lot of the posh-adjacent people do, and that would have worked in her favour if, theoretically, she hadn’t married into the royal family at all. She’s the sort of engimatic working professional who’s into the same sorts of lifestyle stuff as they are, the kind of lifestyle stuff that Tatler writes fluffy articles about in their magazine.

        Her background wouldn’t have been as much of an issue in that instance, bc for them, she wouldn’t have been trying to punch above her weight in terms of society and rank. The thing that shifted the balance is that she married into the royal family. She crossed the class and cultural lines with that one act, and that in and of itself turned that whole society against her, bc that’s simply not done. You learn to stay in your place, not go past it. That’s the moment when everything they would have otherwise liked about her became a point working against her favour.

        My point is that this is the larger hypocrisy within British upper class/upper middle-class society. They only like you if you don’t get ahead of yourself and your station. Once you do, they turn against you.

    • L4frimaire says:

      I remember one insult that kept showing up in print toward Meghan was that she was to clever. It seemed to reflect that upper class disdain for intelligence or drive. It’s almost like a put down, because to them, clever is calculating. Remember Piss Morgan said Wills wanted Harry to marry a dim, conservative blond, a human snoozefest.Then they get upset when they look under prepared and underwhelming on the world stage.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Yes. They attempted using ‘clever’ as being insiduous instead of being intelligent, intellectual and pretty much smarter than most of them.

  30. tw says:

    This is more Middleton PR – “Look! We were bullied, too!” What they don’t get is that two wrongs don’t make a right. It just makes Kate look worse for throwing Meghan under the bus.

    • Margles says:

      Yeah. I think there’s something so horrible about Kate reacting to bullying of Meghan by basically joining in because she thinks it means she finally gets to be one of the cool kids.

      • Lizzie says:

        Khate does’t have it in her to befriend someone. If she did, her and Meghan would have been an unstoppable team. Insecure people are always jealous of anyone who would surpass their own looks or accomplishments.

    • Merricat says:

      I agree with everyone here.

      • Lorelei says:

        Same. And I will never understand women like Kate who don’t seem to want or value girlfriends. I’m happily married but still adore all of my girlfriends and talk (well, text) them as much as possible. It’s a completely different relationship than the one you have with your significant other, and you shouldn’t have to choose one or the other.

        We make each other laugh, we have such great memories…maybe Kate never had friends so she doesn’t realize what she’s missing? Idk, as I said, I’ll never understand. My friends bring so much to my life.

        I think Kate might be a lot happier if she did have some true and trustworthy friends to help her through some of the awful aspects of royal life, like Meghan did. It’s easy to see how much Meghan values her friends and they were an invaluable support system for her over the past few years.

        Kate just seems to be on her own, with only her mother to count on. I wonder if she’s even still as close to Pippa as she used to be? She seems so…closed-off.

    • A says:

      It also makes them look infinitely stupid. Like, this is what they all sold their souls out for? To get a spot with the “in group”, who don’t even like or respect you, and treat your presence with this much contempt? All that social climbing and scheming and Wisteria sistersing, all to just get in with a crowd of people who invite you to social events on the front, and then call you “Hyacinth Bucket” in the least flattering way possible behind your back? Really ya’ll?

      It makes Kate look even dumber for wanting to be a lynchpin for this group of people. It doesn’t come off as self-sacrificing at all. It just makes you look pathetic and desperate, trying so hard to be so nice to a bunch of people who say your taste in decor is tacky, and that you’re a person who uses and then discards people to climb your way to the top.

  31. EllenOlenska says:

    For those of you asking about upper class and lower class words google Nancy Mitford and “ U and nonU “ words and the English Aristocracy.She wrote a very famous article about 65 years ago that spelled them all out. Here’s a more modern discussion

    • Eurydice says:

      I suppose, considering technology, we should all go back to calling it “wireless.” But the English language isn’t alone in class structure. Proust’s novel is filled with comparisons between upper and lower class French, even distinguishing between pre and post Napoleonic aristocracy. And in Greece, there was actual bloodshed over the usage of demotic Greek vs Katharevousa (the high “clean” Greek that was established after the War of Independence from the Ottomans.)

  32. line says:

    All these Clan-Middleton and Kate articles from the period 2006-07 resurfaced is not surprising because the Middeltons need to be put in their place because their PR campaigns have gone way too far. Since Meghan’s arrival, I think the Middeltons have had a false impression of being accepted in the royal and aristocractic circle, all the laudatory articles in their respects their to make one lose the reason because all his articles were just motivated by their hatred towards Meghan. Theirs opinions towards the Middletons haved never changed, but it’s something Kate and her family never understood; just because they hate Meghan doesn’t mean you love you more than her.

    All her articles Kate Guevara, the most sparkling diamond of the house of Windsor, the savior of the monarchy, the photo shooting at Philip’s funeral with his personal photographer. Uncle Gary saying in the Commonwealth countries press that the crown should go directly to William and not Charles because the country needs a Queen Kate, their criticism of a blood prince (Harry), the quote la future queen Catherine and her husband then the final bouquet of Carole which criticizes the parenthood of Diana affirming that she is a better mother figure for William than Diana.Must have pissed off several people in the palace including William first. Which explains the fact that William no longer pretends to support her, and the reason why Diana’s status disclosure was cut off but also the reason why William ignored Pippa and her husband during the football match because they have to do with them.

    • Jais says:

      Hmm, it’s interesting bc all those fawning articles about Kate being the jewel of the monarchy are probably only believed by the lower or middle classes that the Middletons don’t want to be a part of. The aristocrats probably read jewel of the monarchy and make fun of it as much as we do, just probably for different reasons.
      Good point @line that the royal and aristocratic circles never accepted her but she believed they did during the Meghan smear campaign.

      • Lorelei says:

        I wonder if William will ever get angry enough that he would essentially make Kate choose: either him or Carole.

        If he’s pissed off enough by the recent Middleton press campaign to the point where he doesn’t want Carole around, he’ll make it happen. Kate would be pretty screwed.

  33. Eurydice says:

    Those people can tear themselves into pieces for all I care. But I wonder about all the Commonwealth countries – do they all say lavatory and “how de do?”

    • Nic919 says:

      In Canada we would ask for the washroom or bathroom instead of the toilet. At least that’s what we would consider the politer way.

      Also you don’t need to be upper class to know it’s rude to chew gum in most instances. I didn’t need etiquette classes to know that.

      • Anners says:

        Agreed! I also say ‘how do you do?’ but that’s mostly because I’m not always pleased to meet people. 🙂

        I tend to say serviette (I think because we Canadians borrow a lot of French words?) and washroom, though I’ll jokingly call it the loo sometimes. I dunno – I’m solidly middle class, though my grandmother definitely taught me which fork to use when.

    • Eurydice says:

      Thank you, that’s what I thought. Each country and culture has its own social standards and terminology, so the Queen’s standards would be irrelevant. In the US, people tend to say “ladies’ room” or “men’s room,” but with conversations about gender, “bathroom” is the better way.

      So odd to be hearing about chewing gum. I haven’t seen an adult chew gum in years. I don’t even see ads for chewing gum.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Eurydice, it’s been speculated that Carole was trying to quit smoking and was chewing some sort of nicotine gum, which, fine — but that ceremony couldn’t have been much more than, what, an hour? 90 minutes? She should have been able to go that long without it and I’m actually surprised she didn’t know better, especially considering there were cameras there.

        @Nic ITA; it’s not something I specifically remember learning either, I’ve always just sort of known that chewing gum is rude or inappropriate in many situations. If we — two peasants, lol — both know it, then it’s basic enough common sense that Carole should have known too, ffs.

    • A says:

      As an Indian–no, we don’t use the world lavatory.

      However, I was raised to say, “Pardon?”/”Pardon me?” as the most polite way to ask someone to repeat themselves. Saying, “What?” or even, “Sorry, what?” is just…wrong, somehow, and strikes me as more impolite and weird.

      We do say “toilet”/”bathroom”. But, as an Indian who grew up in Canada, we use the word “washroom”/”restroom” up here, which I FAR prefer. Washroom, restroom, ladies room, any of those work. And while some people do say pardon me, a lot of people also just say, “Excuse me?” or “Sorry, could you please repeat that/say that again?” Saying, “What?”, again, is just weird. And kind of entitled, now that I think about it.

  34. Linda says:

    The irony of people making fun of a woman who is self- made and successful when those same people have never worked a day in their lives and are only wealthy because of an archaic class system and inherited wealth. I’ll take Carole any day over a bunch of snobby, aristos.

    • Maria says:

      The Middleton money comes from data-selling and the money-laundering/sex-trafficking/drug-dealing of Uncle Gary. Their finances are secret and extremely shady for a reason. Carole is not better than them.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, the data-selling without client permission was a huge part of their business. As are items made by child labour in Mexico, trading off royal events, and sexualised costumes for young children.

    • Nic919 says:

      Carole attacked Meghan for having a work ethic so she’s no better than the rest and even dumber because she doesn’t see the hypocrisy of her position. Meghan was an actual self made millionaire and Carole felt it was okay to criticize her in an interview, something no royal has ever done directly. So really Carole is even more tactless than the snobs she aspires to fit in with.

      • L4frimaire says:

        This right here. She attacked Meghan for having a work ethic and being prepared and able to give a speech, and having her trash brother constantly attack Meghan. Her family is all over the press and have no problem arranging pap pictures like her St. Barths vacation. She’s a user and whatever ambition or work ethic she had, it’s distorted in her children.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Nic I bet Carole’s public criticism of Meghan pissed off even the BRF. Sort of like, “WE can say bad things about her, but who do you think you are?” They’re all disgusting people in their own little ways, aren’t they.

    • Haylie says:

      You can have Carole. She’s racist garbage just like her daughter and son-in-law. She should’ve kept Meghan’s name out of her mouth. At least she fijbally stopped trying to foist her other untalented, unaccomplished daughter on Harry and on American media.

  35. Over it says:

    You know what I think? The keenbridges are definitely separated. They will be no divorce though. I think the press knows this and they are using these articles to remind the Middletons that at the end of the day when all is said and done, that the Windsors will always have the upper hand because they are the true blue bloods

    • Nic919 says:

      I think they have been separated since we started hearing stories about doing the zooms at sandringham. William clearly didn’t want to stay in the same house as her after too many months of pretending to be in lockdown.

      • notasugarhere says:

        With Philip quickly moved to ‘bubble’ with the Queen, it opened up Wood Farm as a convenient place for William. I doubt he’d want to stay at the main house with all the staff watching him go visit Rose.

  36. equality says:

    Makes me want to say “Hey, woman, where’s the crapper” if I were ever to meet the Queen. See what they made of that.

  37. TabithaD says:

    Very interesting that they’ve dug this up at this precise moment. Someone is sending a message to Carole, I think.
    For what it’s worth, I think all this stuff about the language used used is a red herring. I can believe the Royal Family were snobby about it, but I think they didn’t like her because she was pushy, indiscreet, and probably because of her influence on William, which doesn’t look to have been positive at all. After all, it says TQ liked Michael – he seems a very different sort of character, doesn’t seek out the limelight etc., is not always running off to the press.
    I’ve always thought it was interesting that the Middletons never got an invite to Xmas at Sandringham – even though e.g. Sophie’s dad and Meghan’s mum were invited. I’m pretty sure William asked a few times, and this may have been what inspired that “alternative Xmas” he did at the Middletons’, when they did the copycat church pap stroll, etc.

    • JT says:

      This is a good point. Nobody ever had a bad thing to say about Meg’s mom Doria. She seemed to be accepted right away and even during the height of the smears against Meghan, Doria was largely kept out of it. I bet that burned a whole in Carole’s ass that Meghan’s mom, a black woman, was treated better than the mother of the FFQC.

      • L4frimaire says:

        They totally attacked Doria and Doria never looked for these clown’s acceptance. Remember Rachel Johnson’s comments about her being dreadlocked from the wrong side of the tracks? The thing is Doria has the sense and perspective to step back and stay away from these people because she was always wise to their b*llshit. She knew to stay living her life and be there for her daughter, not that inner circle of snobbery and hell.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @L4frimaire-yes, they went after Doria too. They just tried to be more subversive about it.imo I haven’t forgotten Ruth Styles SOC story.

    • A says:

      “I can believe the Royal Family were snobby about it, but I think they didn’t like her because she was pushy, indiscreet”

      This, exactly. The royals and the posh crowd are snobby, yes, but the snobbery exhibits itself in rather different ways when you’re a nice enough person who isn’t weird about it all. It becomes a much more institutionalized issue than anything else.

      The sort of snobbery that Carole is finding herself up against though, is personal and petty af. It’s rather different in tone, and that makes me think that the reason they don’t like her isn’t just bc of classism, but overwhelmingly because she’s a sucky person.

  38. Matthew says:

    Carole Middleton would barely make it as an appropriate mother-in-law to a basic upper middle class American family. She comes off as gauche and graspy and that tends to play poorly with anyone that comes from money. I don’t condone “doors to manual” but it is quite funny in a way to see her taken down a peg. They act like Kate is some kind of Bourbon princess. She really belongs at the mall.

    • AnneSurely says:

      I come from an upper middle class American family and Carole and my mother are about the same age. My mom would have heard ‘former stewardess’ and thought ‘former prostitute’. And then the gum chewing would have been the final nail in the coffin. Not saying it’s right, just what that generation associates with people like the Middletons. If there’s anything Americans don’t like, it’s people who put on airs. We put a premium on folks being down to earth, whether they actually are or it’s an act.

  39. Ann says:

    Ugh British Classism. I know the USA is rife with prejudices but I think the majority of people just have a general expectation that others should try to be nice, considerate, polite, etc. Which specific terms you use don’t matter so long as your heart is in the right place.

    Carole is awful, but being “self made” is not what makes her so. Posh Brits look down on those who climbed the ladder; they prefer inherited money, which I find so bizarre. I mean, there’s nothing wrong with inheriting money but a rags-to-riches story is better, to me, so long as one wasn’t too ruthless along the way. Which plenty are, but that’s another story.

    I think it’s what you do with the money once you have it that matters the most. The Kennedys are wealthy but many have started charities, spent their lives in public service, etc. It beats spending all of your time chasing unearned money to prop up your ancestral estate, all the while looking down your noses at the ones who provide said money.

    Anyway, interesting that this is coming out now.

  40. MA says:

    I’m not going to be outraged about any of this. They can defend themselves.

  41. Kalana says:

    Because of Kate’s position, the Middletons could associate with the smartest, most talented people in the UK. But they’re fixated on being aristocrats and doing things like wearing pinky rings and arranging a shoot for William. No imagination whatsoever.

  42. Kentuckygirl says:

    I’m trying to imagine if I were a flight attendant in the UK and I’m reading this nonsense. Do I: 1) get pissed because these aristocratic arseholes think they are better than me, and start thinking “abolish the monarchy,” or 2) I’ve been raised understanding that obviously these aristocratic arseholes are better than me, QEII was chosen by God himself, and of course they laugh at my profession. God Save the Queen, right?

    I guess what I’m asking is: do they know that they are offending a good chunk of their constituency by being so elitist, or is the very nature of having a monarchy that the “little people” accept the offensiveness because of the fairy tale they have been sold?

    • Cee says:

      they don’t care.

    • bettyrose says:

      Kentuckygirl – Those are great questions. I’m left all kinds of confused by Brexit, but one thing I always admired about Britain was that I thought they had a real sense of class identity/pride. In the U.S. our racism is pretty blatant. People identify with race over class, so the same working class white people who slam New York/coastal elites voted for Trump, the ultimate New York/coastal elitist because he spoke their racist language. And personally I’ve always thought being a flight attendant sounds like a really cool job (or it was pre-9-11 before massive cutbacks on job perks) but there’s no excuse ever to slam someone for being a contributing member of society with a job that pays the bills and their share of taxes.

    • A says:

      Anyone who lives in the UK knows that this type of contempt on the part of the upper-classes (idle rich) isn’t confined to just flight attendants. It’s not that particular job or career that they’re sneering at. The actual contempt that’s being expressed here is for the idea of having to work a trade, ie, work for a living, rather than having other others work to earn your living for you, which is how the upper classes largely generate their wealth and income today.

      When you’re that wealthy, the idea goes that you don’t have to work a day job from 9-5 to earn your money to get by. Over time, that’s become the defining characteristic that separates the upper classes from the middle and working class. Carole is being looked down on bc she had to work a day job to support herself, and the fact that her wealth came from trade, rather than being inherited (think Mr. Bingley from Pride and Prejudice, and how Caroline Bingley was rude on account of her insecurities about where her family’s wealth came from).

      So a flight attendant wouldn’t read the article and go “eat the rich” bc they’re affronted on behalf of their profession. They’d read the article, and first, just roll their eyes because this attitude is absolutely nothing new in Britain, and they’ve likely come up against it all over the place over the course of their career, and second, probably say “eat the rich” while simultaneously just rolling their eyes bc they’re so familiar with this sort of attitude bc it really permeates so much of the culture over there. That familiarity isn’t necessarily just an acceptance of how society is divinely ordained to function this way. It’s a weariness bc of just how common and not surprising these attitudes actually are. There’s not much quibbling abt how offensive these sentiments are, bc it’s really such a foregone conclusion at this point that these types of elitist attitudes exist.

      • Bettyrose says:

        A – I guess that’s one huge difference between Britain and the US. The mythology of the Protestant work ethic is so strong here that even the wealthiest few put forth the pretense of a career. (With perhaps the one exception of Melania Trump) you’ll find that even socialites who never intended to work can speak to being trained professionals in law, business, or education. Not to say they wouldn’t snub people with less prestigious careers but publicly it’s our culture to profess admiration for hard work.

      • A says:

        @Bettyrose, it’s worth pointing out here too, that the contempt for work on the part of the upper class aristocracy only extends to themselves, and that too, it extends to a certain type of work, ie. “working a trade” as they call it.

        They have no issues promoting the idea that hard work is a virtue for literally everyone else except themselves. And that’s the fundamental hypocrisy at the root of the British class system, and class relations in Britain. For everyone else except the landed gentry and the aristocracy, hard work is not only a necessity and an obligation to keep the fabric of society together, it’s also a moral imperative–but only for *everyone else* except the people at the top. And they won’t even respect you for doing that work, but they’ll consider you next to worthless as a person if you don’t do it too (calling people “benefits scroungers” for example).

        America doesn’t have precisely the same sort of hypocrisy at the root of its class system, bc at the very least, there was a semblance of upward mobility that was actually borne out in reality, at least for white people. Obviously these opportunities were still extremely restricted for anyone who wasn’t white, male, and in many instances, Christian. But for its time, comparatively speaking, the working class in America had a degree of upward mobility that the working class in Britain didn’t, and often still don’t. The difference in American ideology is that hard work, in theory, gets rewarded–with money, with recognition, with increased power. In Britain, hard work means less, in comparison to your background.

  43. Gubbinal says:

    I think that we have front row seats to the Clash of the Titanic Egos. Carole Middleton is a grasping narcissist. Kate has Munchausen-Symdrome-Proxy narcissism.

    Prince Charles, who is denying himself the pleasure of using the D of E title in Scotland.

    His wife, Camilla, is the most adept person at the precise feeding and fuelling of a narcissist. They have a bit of intelligence too but not the insight to know that the BRF has never been able to handle a charismatic beauty (Diana, Meghan)

    • Kalana says:

      I’d love a really good biography of Camilla. She has been a negative influence in Charles’ life for decades. How many people has Charles used to prop up Camilla, including his young wife and his two sons. How can Camilla be in simpering, unconditionally supportive love with such a person? She even managed to pull off not living with Charles full-time.

      Charles called Harry c**t-struck over Meghan, but look at his life and the choices he’s made because of Camilla.

      • swirlmamad says:

        Did he really say that about his own son and DIL? Nasty-mouthed bastard.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @swirlmamad, if he did say that it would be nasty. That was a rumor on popbitch.

        “Effing v blinding
        A tell-all biography of the Harry and Meghan “Megxit” incident made quite a splash in July when it was serialised in the Times, leading to a steady drip of Royal stories, including one in which Prince William supposedly warned Harry not to be “blinded by lust”.
        If that’s what he actually said, William clearly has a more delicate sense of phrasing than Charles. When Harry pulled out of an event at the last minute a few years ago Charles asked organisers to excuse his son’s behaviour, explaining that Harry was just a little bit “cuntstruck” at the moment.”

        Hard to believe Charles would tell organizers of an event that. Was there an event Harry dropped at the last minute a few years ago?

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        If he said it would be nasty. It was a rumor submitted to popb&tch that came after William telling? Harry not to be ‘blinded by lust’ in the new chapters of Lacey’s book. The rumor was that Harry dropped out of an event at the last minute (which doesn’t sound like Harry more like antics of a different couple) and Charles excused Harry’s behavior to the organizers of the event because he was c**tstruck. It sounds like one of those silly made up blind items that have been popping up. If Harry were to drop out of anything he would tell the organizers himself.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Apologize for the double post. Thought the first one went into the internethers.

  44. PoppedBubble says:

    Isn’t it interesting how the price of their 5-bedroom home was included in that old article? lol

  45. bettyrose says:

    Carole makes no sense to me. I get why a girl from council housing was fixated on upward mobility but I don’t understand her obsession with the RF or titled aristocracy at all. I don’t judge her for sending her kids to the best schools, but I judge her reasons for doing so. She was raising children in the 1990s, not the 1890s. For why would you not encourage them to take advantage of their fabulous educations in pursuing their own interests, and even in seeking out rich husbands to marry for love? It’s crazy that Pippa ended up in a love marriage because aristo society didn’t want her, but good on her for getting the real prize. I hate to say something good about the Kardashians, but at least they travel in circles where if you’re rich no one cares how you got there.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I think Carole gets the aspirations from her mother – her nickname was ‘The Duchess’ and from what has been spoken about her was all about airs and graces. Carole did well for herself, back in the day it wasn’t easy to become an air hostess and at one point was seen as a good career opportunity. And this was before she and Mike started their own business – Carole always had the hustle to make life good for herself and her family. For some, everything is just never enough.

      I was my early 20s in the 90s and it was good times – I remember going to illegal raves in fields, cheap holidays to Spain etc..

      • bettyrose says:

        Digital Unicorn –
        On this side of the pond, the 90s were similar. That decade was my mid-teens to mid-twenties, and ITA about raves and cheap travel (the dollar was very strong so overseas travel was often cheaper than domestic. I’m guessing similar for the pound). I backpacked through Europe twice in the 90s and in the expensive cities like Paris & London was very frugal, but actually ate in restaurants and stayed in pensions rather than hostels in Greece and Italy. As I said in a post above, flight attendant seemed like a very appealing career back then. The perks were slashed after 9-11, but I can’t imagine looking down on someone for such a job (or any job that contributes to society).

      • A says:

        Aw man, this just reminded me of the fact that they literally called Carole “Hyacinthe Bucket” in that Tatler article, and then said she was “NQOCD” (“Not quite our class, darling”). Yeesh.

    • UnionSnack says:

      I somehow think that Carole wanted herself as a Charles’ wife and her obsession with the royal family is not healthy at all. Who else would name it’s kids after royal family members??? Catherine Elizabeth, Philippa Charlotte, James William… Tbh that freaks me out. That’s why all of this “Carole better than Di” articles are coming – Carole always believed she is better than Diana – for William, for Charles, for monarchy etc. That’s kind of her “revenge” to a woman (Di) who accidentally “stepped into Carole’s shoes”.

      Di was always what Carole wanted to be – aristo, beautiful, Queen of Hearts.

  46. Nick G says:

    Well, Kaiser, your theory sparked a great convo!

  47. h-barista says:

    “Carole and former pilot husband Michael became self-made millionaires through their successful business Party Pieces, a mail-order firm for kids’ costumes”

    Not Uncle Gary money at all 🤔

  48. Alexandria says:

    They’re dodgy. You think the royal family won’t be doing their research? The Middletons are dodgy. Not because she’s a former air stewardess or the way she talks although that doesn’t change the fact the royals are snooty. Unfortunately the royal family is dodgier. So it’s one dodgy family to another for the UK once George ascends. Hope we don’t have to see it.

    • A says:

      I don’t think they’re dodgy, at least not any more than any of the actual members of the aristocracy, many of whom are far dodgier and scandalous than the Midds with their pot farm money.

      I think what’s probably the case is that they’re just not nice people. They’re people who put up a front of being fake and nice, but really aren’t, and everyone can sniff out the fact that they’re calculating opportunists who use people and then discard them on their way up the ranks.

      If you’re a posh toff who acts this way, you’ll have the benefit of your background to count on from ever really being shut out of high society, but people won’t really care for you.

      If you’re the matriarch of a middle-class family who made their money through trade, who isn’t even genuinely a good person, and on top of that, chews gum, lacks decorum, and has tacky taste in interior design? AND has the audacity to be pompous and demanding to the people you’ve contracted to do implement said taste? Yeah, you’re not going to really be privy to a lot of invitations to peoples homes in that case, no.

  49. Robert says:

    I’ve read all your comments and they are really interesting. But it did make me think. All these royals are worried about how you speak and dress. But if you believe in Darwin, these are the type of people evolution would wipe out first. Plus go back in history. It was the stronger more barbarian people who founded the aristocracies. In the past if there hadn’t been a man who beat up and killed others, there wouldn’t be a Queen Elizabeth.

    • TEALIEF says:

      Too true, Robert, on Kings and the origins of their species. One of my favourite rabble-rousers, and man ahead of his time, Thomas Paine, said of the “race of Kings” that once removed from the patina of antiquity that the first of them was “nothing better than the principal ruffian of some restless gang whose savage manners … obtained him the title of chief among plunderers”. I always laugh out loud when I read that because it’s true, Chief of the Plunderers! He also said hereditary succession as a matter of right was an insult and imposition on posterity. The plundering and insulting imposition continues.

  50. MissySnow says:

    I read a few Sussex squad tweets that show BM media hit pieces on MM are being cleaned up and that could be because of the bullying allegations or have to do with showing William, Kate and Middleton’s were also bullied by the trolling media.

  51. russianblue says:

    This article is very interesting, especially because I’ve picked up on a fair number of anti-Kate tabloid stories in the past few days in this same vein. My tinfoil hat is firmly on my head at this point, and I’ve come up with two theories on what could be going on here:

    My first theory is that KP is trying to put Kate and the Middleton camp in their place, or even might be prepping the stage for a separation. By unearthing this old criticism of Kate and her mother, they can try to plant the idea that Kate was never a suitable wife or queen consort. They want to get it in the public’s head that the Middletons are nothing but gold-diggers and social climbers taking advantage of William and the monarchy (gee, this narrative is starting to sound familiar).

    My next theory seems less likely, but I still think it could be a possibility that this is from the Middletons to garner sympathy for Kate. The classist overtones of the article could be there deliberately in order to position Kate as the middle-class victim of an oppressive and snobbish institution. The Kate-as-victim narrative gels nicely with what Harry and Meghan revealed in the Oprah interview, and could push public opinion in her favour in the event of a separation.

    Speculation aside, I’m not rooting for anyone in this little PR war (if that’s even what this is).

    • A says:

      I think that the Middletons tried to spin the disdain towards them as classist bullsh-t for decades, but it never quite worked out like how they hoped, bc the story itself was just too amazingly shady for royal reporters to ever spin as fully sympathetic.

      It would have been a different issue if, you know, the Middletons actually *were* nice people, but they’re not. I always felt like a lot of these articles were just relishing in the fact that they were so disliked by the very people they were desperate to get chummy with.

      Even the anecdotes about Kate that are supposed to make her look ordinary and nice and suburban wind up not sounding anywhere close to being genuine. People who are genuinely nice, who aren’t feeding PR scripts to friendly reporters in the media, are just talked about in a different way than how the Middletons are in these articles. It’s all just a little weird in a hard to explain way, but it all ultimately points to the fact that the Midds are disliked across the board, and I honestly can’t say that it’s simply on account of their class. It’s probably also because they’re just not very nice people in general.

    • February-Pisces says:

      I definitely thought of both theories too. Could ma middy be trying to get people to sympathise with her, the say way that people sympathised with the racism that Meghan endured? If that’s the case then Ma is in for disappointment, because those people who would have backed them now hate them for the part they played in meghans smear campaign.

      But then again Ma hates people being reminded of how ‘common’ she is. Plus it’s very targeted at Ma in particular and not the other middletons. So it seems like they could be taking personal shots at her in particular.

      Either way the divergence between Willie and the middletons seems more and more obvious.

  52. A says:

    A few things come to mind here. One, Kate looks soooooo much better in her pre-marriage, Waity days than she does now. There is a genuine glow and happiness in her face that, honestly, seems really hard to come by these days for her. Two, Carole bears such a close resemblance to Kate, it’s amazing.

    Three, this is such a bored little article that I honestly don’t think it was brought on by anything in particular. It’s literally a stack of quotes copy pasted together, and it seems pretty buried in the paper for it to get a lot of traction. I don’t think this was really a huge PR effort undertaken by anyone as a retaliation against the Middletons. The author of the article doesn’t seem to be well-connected from what I can tell, and there’s honestly nothing new here to speak of.

    It’s just a rehash of the prevailing sentiment against the Middletons by the upper-crust aristocracy that continues to this day. Its main hook is the absurdity of the language Carole uses being counted as something against her suitability. And the messaging here is really just a double-edged sword for Kate. It tries to make her look sympathetic, but really, just puts out all the same insulting sh-t that people have said about them for years.

    And it’s got to be hard to be reminded that you’re still out there on the fringes, even after 20 odd years of having sold your soul to get to where you have. Particularly for people like Carole and Kate, who are incredibly, painfully insecure about themselves, even after all this time. It cuts them to the quick that they’re still not really accepted by the aristocracy they’re so desperate to be a part of. They desperately want to not give a f-ck about that, but they can’t help but do.

    And ironically, it’s the very fact that they care so much that gets used against them, bc they can’t even bring themselves to be honest about their ambitions. They claim to be proud of being middle-class, but grovel when faced with the class system. They claim that they’re just an ordinary middle-class family, but behave with nothing but contempt and disdain for anyone who actually is middle-class. They claim they’re perfectly nice people, but they’re actually total assholes. They claim that they don’t care about titles, status or any of it, but they do. They don’t want to show themselves for being too ambitious and calculating, but they’re so bad at hiding it that it just becomes insulting, and that’s precisely why people don’t like them.

  53. Gobo says:

    I imagine their (and the press’s) treatment of Diana means that there are very few, if any, aristo girls willing to go anywhere near the Windsors.

  54. Woo woo says:

    The British take their class system very seriously indeed – it is baked into their identity. It’s not just what jobs your parents had, but your accent, your education (not your grades, just whether you went to the right schools), the words you use, the supermarket you shop at, what you drink. Truly nothing merit based to see here! Colossal waste of energy, unless you’re “on top”. Then you must keep reinforcing to everyone else why they’re such unworthy plebs! How else will they learn?

  55. Woo woo says:

    I don’t think the Middletons would ever have been accepted in the aristocratic circles, but they don’t seem to have helped themselves much either.

  56. Lizzie says:

    Middletons will never be accepted by aristos and they will never be respected either. I think most people admire someone who takes pride in themselves and where they come from as opposed to changing your accent and aggressive social climbing.

  57. Emerald Crystal says:

    I have learned quite a lot about the difference between the classes in England and also, the proper greeting and requests to use the “toilet”. Ugh! That word sounds disgusting to this Southern woman. Reminds me of the TV character Archie Bunker’s vocabulary. I think that he somehow managed to get an “R” sound in the word,as well. I think that the ladies’room or restroom sounds so much more discreet and less vulgar. I have probably never said pardon in my life, unless I was doing a cheesy British accent, so it turns out my accent of a Brit saying, “Pardon me.” would shoot me in the foot. I guess that I will have to get a bit Beetlejuiced for any royal greeting and just start rambling, Hey, how ya doing? What’s going on here?

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      The British accent isn’t as easy for me as an Irish accent. Restroom/bathroom is what i would ask for. In my 50 plus years I have never heard (or know anyone) who has asked for the toilet.

      I’m in the Great Lakes area.

  58. Sunnyvale says:

    My grandmother’s fav quote was; don’t dig graves for others or you’ll end up falling in them. The Middletons got over their heads in & ended up believing their own lies about them being “indispensable” . Willywanker got fed up & is reminding them how they’re never accepted. I agree with others that something is going on behind the scenes. The house search & willy’s recent solo appearances were my clue. I doubt these two will make it past 15yrs(like charles and diana)

  59. BayTampaBay says:

    @Leanne – Meghan thought the same thing too!