Prince William & Kate’s children are ‘very polite’ & ‘have all the right ingredients’

Prince Louis and the Duke of Cambridge on the balcony, 2019 Trooping the Colour

As we discussed, the latest issue of People Magazine’s quarterly Royals edition is all about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They are super-busy being “the modern face of the institution,” which means that they simply cannot do any work. They just have to sit around and endlessly be the face of the monarchy. But did you know that they are keen parents as well? Of course. Because whenever there are rumors about the poor state of the Keen marriage, the children are deployed as a deflection. People Magazine did a lil’ slideshow with old photos of Kate, William and the kids and there were some new quotes in there:

Will & Kate invented modern royal parenthood! But unlike previous royal generations, Kate and William “can mix traditional duty with being thoroughly modern parents,” a family friend tells PEOPLE Royals in the fall issue.

Prince George is a lad: One family friend tells PEOPLE the third in line to the throne is a “cracking little lad.”

Kate is keen for kids: “Her motherly values are clear to see,” says a close friend.

WTF is this quote? The Cambridge kids are “all very polite children,” says the family friend, “but they have a little twinkle in their eyes. They have all the right ingredients.”

This quote is strange too: According to a royal source, William “is conscious of making sure the children have as normal a relationship with their parents as they can.”

William is desperate for credit: While Kate rightly gets plenty of credit, some of those close to the couple say William’s role as co-parent should not be underestimated. The Duke of Cambridge is “pretty grounded as well,” says a source who knows them.

He’s so keen to get credit!! William and Kate’s partnership is “something that is incredibly important to both of them,” says the source who knows the couple. “Wanting to bring a good groundwork and base to family life is in her background, but it is something William has always wanted [too]. That is driven as much by him as her.”

[From People]

I think it’s gross to talk about children this way: “They have all the right ingredients.” I’m reminded of how British royalty and British aristocracy talk about children in horse-breeding terms. Someone has “good breeding,” or Kate added her sturdy commoner genes into the weak royal line. Talking about “good ingredients” with children is just… putting the emphasis on the wrong thing, yet again. And WTF is that quote? William “is conscious of making sure the children have as normal a relationship with their parents as they can.” William is Father of the Year because he doesn’t demand that his children refer to him as Future Future King, I guess. That’s what it feels like: “William is such a good father because he doesn’t put on airs… with his children.” Oh, and Diana was the one who brought modern parenting to the House of Windsor. What Will and Kate are doing is much more of a throwback.

cambridge people royal cover

The Duke of Cambridge during his visit to Brighter Futures

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

139 Responses to “Prince William & Kate’s children are ‘very polite’ & ‘have all the right ingredients’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. MY3CENTS says:

    All the right ingredients? I’m sorry is that racist for the purity of their all white bloodline?

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, it is – when it’s full stop like that. Otherwise, they could have all the right ingredients to make a cake

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Eurydice, that was my first reaction as I read the headline before I clicked on the article, so they are the perfect ingredients for cake? Are they going to bake ‘lil George as sniveling little rage monster, storming around the palace grounds storming to let him have his way? And Charlotte to be a doormat, stalker and lazy-do-nothing a she pretends to be keen? As she’s walking around in her hand me down buttons looking for the worst of all the aristocracy in landing a husband? And poor Luis will be the third wheel expected to be George’s scapegoat for George as he acceded to the throne to do the actual work all the while allowing George is king?

        Got it!! Nothing like baking in their parents most egregious traits as they grow into adults!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ BothSidesNow, sorry everyone, my edit was more condensed and exact.

    • Haylie says:

      Yep and People Magazine the s trash for even letting that go to print.

    • rawiya says:

      That’s the first thing I thought of because what?!?!? Who talks about children that way?

    • Keri says:

      People should vocally complain on social media and email whatever idiot editor let that racist statement go to print. They deserve to be boycotted for that trash. They’ll be singing a different tune if enough people call them out on the racism. We should not let any paper get away with this type of BS in the US without serious consequences.

    • Ann says:

      That’s exactly what I thought when I read it.

    • BeanieBean says:

      That’s exactly what I understood it to mean, too. Disgusting.

    • Lorelei says:

      It was one of their loudest dog whistles yet. I don’t know how I’m still shocked, but I am, and especially disgusted that People printed this. I know they’ve gone downhill in recent years, but this is outrageous.

    • TeamAwesome says:

      Yup, sounds about white.

    • lolalola3 says:

      #Oooof. You hit the nail on the head there! Just when you think those two dolts couldn’t get any worse.

    • February-Pisces says:

      That’s exactly how I read it, obviously embiggening the children for being white, not like their cousins. But to describe children as having the ‘right ingredients’ is so f*cking wrong. What about children with disabilities, do they not have the ‘right ingredients’. What would Willie and keen do if one of the kids didn’t turn out ‘perfect’, would that child not be worthy of praise? Would they lock them away like the royals did with prince John. Their obsession with being ‘perfect’ is so f*cking weird.

      I think the Cambridge kids are gonna need a lot of therapy when they are older.

    • Liz version 700 says:

      Yep they have all the right white ingredients is what that means. These people are so gross. I am surprised that quote was left in unless People is trolling them a bit. It could not be more obvious.

    • Kelly says:

      100% racist bullshit

  2. Jezz says:

    So… joint custody, then?

    • Amy Too says:

      William as “coparent” was weird. Coparenting is something that separated and divorced couples do. Parenting is what couples who are still together do together.

    • Mac says:

      Pretty sure they are just using gender stereotypes. Like women are expected to raise the kids, so it’s “co-parenting” when the father participates.

      • JT says:

        I’ve never heard of married couples being described as coparents, gender stereotypes or not. It is an odd thing to say about a seemingly happy marriage and the Keen’s parenting has never been represented like that before. Do you need to coparent if you live in the same household?

      • Sid says:

        JT, ITA. I have never heard the word coparent used like this. It has always been in the context of parents who are not a committed couple.

    • Slippers4 life says:

      Almost just spat out my tea laughing at this comment.

  3. Merricat says:

    The main ingredient is bleached flour.

  4. Krista says:

    All I can say looking at that first picture is how….unkind…the years have been. Yikes. I try not to judge people on their looks but that picture is probably one of the most unflattering I have seen of him!

    • Erin says:

      MTE. I’m the same age as these two so I have friends the same age and some of us look our age and some don’t, it’s life. While Kate looks good, probably due to fillers and photoshop, William just….does not and considering the ultimate privileged life he’s lived/lives, I’m just really surprised. I mean, he WAS Diana when he was young and she looked amazing at this age. It’s wild. I also believe that your soul eventually comes out in your face though so there’s that.

      • Mac says:

        Stop it. Looks have nothing to do with personality.

      • Erin says:

        I don’t think you have to be conventionally attractive or good looking to to be so if you are a good person or have a good personality. I think you can also have the most beautiful face in the world but if you are a terrible hateful person you won’t be attractive. Personality has a lot to do with it IMO and there are several celebs/famous people/people I personally know that should be attractive but aren’t because we/I know they are terrible people and vice versa. That’s my opinion though and this is a gossip site so there you have it.

      • equality says:

        I know people who aren’t conventionally attractive but who I find attractive because they are pleasant and usually smiling. Will and Edward look a lot alike but Edward looks better than Will to me because he seems less tense and uptight.

      • Shoes not blues says:

        Diana was never his age 😢. She was three years younger than he is now when she died.

      • North of Boston says:

        There are a couple of quotes I like on that subject

        “When you have good thoughts they will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely” R Dahl

        “At 50 you get the face you deserve” various

        “After 40 you are responsible for your own face” Abe Lincoln supposedly

      • Sarah I says:

        No unkindness intended to Mac. With all respect, personality has EVERYTHING to do with looks. If I may respectfully disagree. For looks are how we perceive someone, and I’ve never said that jerk is so good looking. People’s personality either draw you in, regardless of their classical good looks or not, or they repel you.

        I feel sorry for William. In the looks department, and he just looks unhappy and disappointed.

        Also, let me misphrase an old quote: When you are young, you have the face that youth gives you; when you are middle aged, you have the face that experience gives you, and when you are old, you have the face you deserve.

        I can’t help but remember pictures taken when William was in college and still really cute, and he was so obviously aware of his looks, and seemingly invested in his looks, and posing like crazy. And one picture in particular that really stunned me, posing with a pencil to his face in such a self-aware cutesy pose. I’m sorry for him that he lost his looks so fast, but if all you are invested in is your looks, man, what a let down you are in for. And if you are invested in other people and giving and loving and serving, people will love you no matter what age does to your face and body. They love YOU.

      • Debbie says:

        We all know what you were trying to say, Erin. The clenched jaw, the uptight looks, the grimace that passes as a smile, the snobbish expression even when looking at his wife (ok, I kind of get that one, but still).

  5. Amy Bee says:

    William and Kate live a totally royal lifestyle, this is in no way normal. From what I’ve seen the children are very much posh and privileged.

  6. HeatherC says:

    The wrong ingredients would be anything other than white of course. Those comments were disgusting. I feel badly in advance advance for the Cambridge kids when they inevitably act up or act out in public.

  7. Becks1 says:

    The right ingredients?? wow. Way to basically just come out and say “they’re white.”

    As much as they may push the “we’re so normal” narrative and people buy into it for Kate at least, does anyone actually think of William as being “grounded?”

    • Cessily says:


    • Nic919 says:

      People seem to forget that Kate grew up as a lazy rich girl as much as William grew up with privilege . Those kids don’t have grounded parents in any form and don’t have any decent examples of adults outside of nanny Maria.

      • Becks1 says:

        Right? That’s whats so funny about the whole “we’re so normal” thing – they aren’t normal, and they don’t want to be “normal.” They want to not have to work. They want to be incredibly rich and privileged and to have their every whim catered to and go on lavish vacations and everything else. If William is looking at the Middletons as “normal” then its clearly a warped view.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Becks1 – too true. And I’ll add that nobody else wants them to be normal, either. People don’t follow the royals because they’re normal; anybody can be normal. There’s a lot of grumbling about the cost of the royals, but nobody really wants to see Kate wearing the same outfit every day and making Kraft dinner for the kids at night. If you’re going to spend money on a monarchy, it had better be glamourous. The trick is to accept the royal status with grace, embrace the obligations that go with it and not rub wealth and privilege in the public’s face. If W&K can be kind and show some empathy toward others, that’s all the “normal” people want. But they don’t seem capable of this, which is why everything they do looks fake.

      • Christine says:

        Bingo, Eurydice. To wit: Princess Diana. It’s like Wills and Kate are striving to be her opposite, except sartorially, of course. Any intelligent person would lean into her example of kindness and empathy, but nope, not these two.

    • Maria says:

      I think a lot of people are convinced that because Kate’s family all sat down and had breakfast together with William or something as a habit that that means they’re all so down-to-earth and he’s always had a taste for being just like us and this proves it!111!! Lol.

    • Lucy says:

      White is right, after all (barf). William is grounded in the sense that he had that one black work friend who would go to the press and defend him.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Should have read ‘all the white ingredients’ if they were being honest.

  8. cathy says:

    Prince Louis is normal and polite in that family. Charlotte and George don’t come anywhere near Archie speak volume. Also, charlotte was rude to the photographer. Prince George doesn’t have a twinkle in his eyes. His eyes look sad always like kate’s. Kate used to have liveness in her eyes, it slowly disappear. Cambridge is not good parents.

    Unlike Spain and Sweden, these kids don’t like public outings and always have grumpy attitudes. Cambridge showed their children that it’s ok to throw your sibling under the bus as long as you get good PR.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      I’m not bashing George here when I say this. George is taking after William at events where he looks bored and over it. Those kids are learning from one of the worst sets of next in line royals.

      And at the rate will and Kate are reminding everyone they will not work, but do expect all the best perks without compromise, we’ll I doubt there will be a monarchy left for those kids.

      • Merricat says:


      • Ginger says:

        Whenever we see George and Charlotte at events, they both look bored and also scared. They don’t enjoy it at all. When you see other royal families, the kids look much more relaxed in public than the Cambridge kids.

      • TabithaD says:

        Their parents have obvious contempt for the public – and the kids are bound to pick that up too. And Charlotte already seems quite bratty.
        They do get wheeled out from time to time but we don’t really see them do normal “kid” stuff (we did see that with Diana when her sons were little, interestingly).

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t see them being scared. As WW wrote, George is taking after his attitude-filled father. Charlotte definitely acts out and like a brat in public, which is why Nanny Maria is never far away.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        George and Charlotte definitely has shy stages, but I agree they both seem to not enjoy most events.
        And if the Cambridge’s keep pushing their kids out like young and well kept adults they’re going to get treated like such. Poor kids.

      • Over it says:

        I agree George is the shorter version of William in his attitude

      • Becks1 says:

        I’m always hesitant to judge the children based on the few times we have seen them in public, but I do think that children pick up on SO much from parents, whether the parents know they’re putting something out there or not, and since William and Kate clearly avoid work, hate having to show up for work events, etc – the kids are going to pick up on that and think of royal duties as something they’re stuck with, think of the cameras as something to hate, think of mingling with the masses as a chore that they just want to get through, etc. I don’t think other royal families approach it the same way with their children so thats why I think we see those royal children appearing more comfortable in public.

    • Couch potato says:

      Since you mention Sweden and Spain; could it be that the children of other royal families are more comfortable in public, because they are more comfortable with their parents? They no doubt have nannies too, but many of the other royal families are far more hands on parents than Willnot and Cannot. It also seems like the parents have a much better relationship with each other. In addition to Sweden and Spain, look at Willem-Alexander and Maxima, Haakon and Mette-Marit, Frederik and Mary. They all look like they love and care about their spouses. When children spends a lot of time with parents who loves and respect each other, it makes children feel safe and more comfortable in situations who could be scary. Many of them also have more hands on grandparents, who’s also attending some of the arrangements with them.

      • Cathy says:

        I agree but I disagree to fred and Mary. Fred constantly cheat on mary and mary doesnt care as long as she is the queen. Mary is horrible human, she only cares about her first son and twin daughter. In public many times mary treat her first daughter in a bad manner. Rest of other royal family have laid back approach to the kids. Cambriges kids look miserable all the time. Maybe they wear uncomfortable clothes?? George used to lively eyes but not anymore. I think he might knows abt his parents situation. Kids knows lot more adult think. Maybe that’s why he looks sad these days. Who knows what is going with house of cambriges

      • MissMarirose says:

        I think you also have to consider how the press in each country act toward the children. I doubt that the British press are better behaved than their counterparts on the continent.

  9. Seraphina says:

    I have to say that I’m shocked they used the wording they did. It screams what everyone else here is saying it screams. How could it not????

  10. ohrhilly says:

    I’m surprised because he throws shade at them every chance he can get.

  11. Sofia says:

    “The right ingredients” didn’t sit well with me either. It could just mean “they’re polite, well mannered, have good behaviour etc etc” but still doesn’t sit well with me.

    Anyways, I’m sure the kids are polite and well behaved but unlike what this article is saying, I give that credit to Kate and the nannies over William.*

    *I’m not saying fathers in general aren’t involved or don’t deserve credit. They do, they absolute do. But I don’t think William is as involved as Kate and the nannies.

    • Lila says:

      @Sofia It doesn’t sit well with you because it’s a dog whistle. What they’re really doing is reminding people that the Cambridge kids are white and that’s why they’re good kids.

  12. Nina says:

    This has CarolE written all over it

  13. The Duchess says:

    So this is how low their PR has sunken? Talking about their children like they’re breeding horses. I can’t deal.

  14. Abena Asantewaa says:

    Right ingredients for what? The statement is devoid of any intelligence, it’s just hanging there, it’s embarrassing!

  15. lanne says:

    And so it begins. The media sets standards for the kids that are completely arbitrary and unfair. When will we start hearing that George is a “little leader” even though he may be nothing of the sort? And that Charlotte is a “perfect little lady” and Louis is “a bit of a devil?” These labels aren’t cute. They’re incredibly basic, and likely have zero basis in reality. They are also intrusive and unfair. Those kids will be shoehorned into these roles whether they fit or not. What if any of the kids are queer? What if the boys like traditionally feminine things or Charlotte likes masculine things? What if they show interest in anything other than shooting, horses, or sailing? Poor kids. I don’t envy them their wealth or their privilege. I feel sorry for them because of how little choice they will have in how they conduct their lives.

  16. Snuffles says:

    “ They have all the right ingredients.”

    Yeah, that doesn’t sound Aryan and white supremacist at all.

  17. North of Boston says:

    “All the right ingredients” is a really gross way to talk about little children. So, what, pray tell are the wrong ingredients??

    My ears are ringing from the bigoted dog whistles clanging from these “close family friends”

  18. SexyK says:

    Why is William & Kate trying to push their brand of monarchy on the US? We got rid of it in 1776. Also, haven’t they seen the huge change in our population? Its less white and will continue to be more diverse. They are stuck in 1950 and they will FAIL in their plans to appeal to the US.

    • Surly Gale says:

      They appeal to the veraciously vocal MAGA crowd, most definitely.

    • Debbie says:

      Your point is very well taken, but this attempt to push their brand in the US is made all the easier by American employers’ eagerness to hire folks w/ English accents to prominent media positions. Then these English people spread their own customs here, despite the fact that they were kicked out.

  19. Woke says:

    How they manage to be so bland and boring ? When you’re leaning more towards a brand based on your family life rather than what work you do, you have to be at least interesting and give more than that.
    Both Harry and William have a fetish for this normal life thing, I don’t know how William manage to make it sound fake coming from him.

  20. Over it says:

    Kaiser, right ingredients is code for they are right because they are all white. I see Carole decided to throw Baldimort a bone and include him this time in her fanfiction piece for people.
    Go do some actual work and stop being just the face you f——ing welfare prince and princess

  21. Chantal says:

    “The right ingredients” Of course it’s all about the bloodline. It’s funny how they conveniently forget about Queen Charlotte allegedly being mixed race. The BM used her to claim that they’re not racist and Meghan isn’t the first in the family. Now that Meghan’s gone, they’re denying QC had any mixed race heritage. Is little Charlotte named after her? They know W&K can’t really compete with H&M so are instead inviting unfavorable comparisons between the Cambridge and Sussex children with the “perfect Cambridge kids” narrative. The sly digs at W did not go unnoticed. I guess Camp Middleton is back.

  22. Div says:

    Ingredients? Yikes…very poor choice of words considering the family’s racism.

    Honestly odd just how supercharged the PR machine has been lately. For example, I noticed how the new Diana movie with KStew is being ripped to shreds by royal fam friendly UK outlets despite receiving (mostly) positive reviews…like multiple articles on it (which is absurd as it’s not out for months & only shown at festivals…like there’s no reason to write so much on it) & apparently misrepresenting the plot/taking quotes out of context to make it seem disrespectful to Diana when in reality it’s apparently about how terrible the royal fam is in general & quite sympathetic to Diana.

    That’s not the only thing the PR machine seems worked up about…lots of weird articles lately and not just the usual racist harassment. Really wondering if they are trying to distract from something big.

    • booboocita says:

      It’s not even out yet, but I *soooo* want it to be a smashing success, just to provoke the frothing, slavering frenzy from the RR that will accompany any good press. And then I want Oscar noms for KStew, the director, and the movie, so I can sit back and watch aneurysms in real time.

      Petty? Yes. Delicious? Hell, yes.

  23. ChattyCath says:

    George is one of the saddest children I’ve ever seen. In all his pictures. Charlotte sticks her tongue out at photographers and Louis is the only child with any joie de vivre which he’ll soon lose. It’s an insult to the intelligence of readers to imagine that W&K ‘parent’ these children much at all . They have full time nannies plus ubiquitous CarolE

    • Lyds says:

      Their lives are not normal and it’s clear that any child will respond/react to that environment accordingly. I have a 2.5 year old son who sometimes covers his face and says “no photo” to me, and I don’t use any flash and am generally pretty restrained with my family photography! Can’t imagine the constant, flashing bulbs and how you literally have to train your kid like a show pony to produce the best pictures for the rags/masses. I fully understand why Charlotte sticks out her tongue or if George feels sad or scared; I can too easily picture my own child screaming and yelling at the photogs. Nothing about their lives or training is normal.

      • cathy says:

        I know their life is not normal but that’s the advantage of being born royal. These Cambridge have way more normal bringing than William and harry. George is 8 years old, this is not the age to be sad. What he is sad about? He is living the life that most kids dream about. This is a lame excuse, other royal kids behave well then these. They get photographed by their mother and I don’t think they have to sit for hours for the perfect spot.

      • Maria says:

        The kid has to dress like junior CEO at a sports game and can’t even sit close to his mom. Charlotte looked absolutely terrified on the 2019 Christmas walk and she was forced to hug complete strangers. Of course they have things to be sad about, lol.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The vast majority of their lives are lived in private, away from photographers. Whatever the kids are acting out against or responding to, it isn’t the paps. It is the strained and fraught relationship between their miserable parents.

      • Tessa says:

        I think Kate and William push their children out to the media more than Diana and Charles did. Diana and Charles at least spared the public the ‘perfect family” video and their having to memorize lines to pay tribute to Attenborough.

  24. TheOriginalMia says:

    The right ingredients…that’s not a racist dog whistle, it’s a freaking 100 piece marching band.

  25. Nic919 says:

    I wonder if the next People magazine article will stop with the coded language and just use the 14 words. Because that right ingredients comment is basically there.

  26. Jais says:

    So People has these royal special editions where they talk about the special ingredients in the oh so special Cambridge children. Am curious if HM will ever be a cover for one of these special People covers or is it only HRH royals? Like what kind of special deal is going on bw People and the royals. I believe the new editor is a Brit? It’s just weird propaganda about special ingredient bloodlines. Gross and tone-deaf by whoever is feeding these quotes.

  27. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    The children are very young and should not be expected to act or behave a certain way at ALL times, so it just goes to show the sources have not spent time with any child and are just speaking platitudes.

    As for the Cambridges, they seem to pretty much want credit for not going full ” children are not to be heard, but seen” creed… however, since the past year I have been suspicious it is exactly what they are up to, a slightly modernized approach of how aristocrats raise their children.

    Kate is, by far, more involved in the day to day business, like most women are, so again, why this need to get praised for being there?

    The truth is : they do love their children but they do not, absolutely do not, place the children first. The Firm, for both of them, is first, then they come second as we saw when the reports said Kate´s conveniece would be more important when they decide to move than the children´s school life, and THEN, just then, come the children.

    • notasugarhere says:

      In addition to all the housekeepers, cooks, cleaners? They have three nannies. The level of either of their involvement in day-to-day business is questionable. We’ve seen how much time Kate spends shopping, getting her hair done (3 hours minimum per visit, several visits per week), working out with her personal trainers and tennis coaches. She isn’t doing the nitty-gritty child rearing 24 hours a day.

      • Moderatelywealthy says:

        Did I say she did? Out of the two, she is the most involved, as it happens in 90% of households the women do more childrearing, the point being why should she get praise for something everyone else is doing?

      • notasugarhere says:

        You definitely implied that she did. Let’s dispense with the idea that this is one of those 90% of households, as none of those stats apply to this situation.

        She is known for spending many many hours every week in grooming, self-care, shopping, chasing William across the field to Houghton. Housekeepers, cooks, and three nannies do the vast majority of the work. There is nothing to indicate to me that she does any more in the household or with the kids than William.

      • Moderatelywealthy says:

        I did not mean ,nor I thought I had to make clear , that Kate does do the dishes, is pot training Louis etc…

        Only that she us the one actually living with the kids. Willie gets busy at the office some nights and cannot possibly make it to berakfast….

        I have no idea why you believe I was saying that Kate does everything…just that’s she does more than Will as most women do more than their husbands in their households, point being : she does not deserve praise for that. Neither Will for playing “provider” for that matter.

  28. ABritGuest says:

    The right ingredients? Gross way to talk about them. If this source is really a family friend shows a lot about their circle thinks. Coupled with Ingrid Seward saying M-it problems could have been avoided if Harry had married Cressida- the dog whistles are very loud.

    I don’t think this need to pretend to be perfect is very helpful for the Cambridges family especially as the kids will grow up in a more accessible social media age.

    • Merricat says:

      Agreed. What’s next, never-put-a-foot-wrong childhoods? Ugh, poor little things.

      • Scorpion says:

        @merricat absolutely we will be hearing how they are the perfect children who never put a foot wrong. They are setting these kids up for a fall.

        There is no such thing as perfection in people, life etc….

    • L4frimaire says:

      Such a dog whistle. This while there seems to be some manufactured hysteria around a baby christening in order to attack the Sussexes again. It’s just so cynical and ugly.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Right @Abritguest, Seward reportedly is a friend of Cressida’s mother. But as we know, Harry was heading for further complications with the firm regardless of who he married. In addition, Cressida and Harry never seemedvv

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Right @Abritguest, Seward reportedly is a friend of Cressida’s mother. But as we know, Harry was heading for further complications with the firm regardless of whom he married. In addition, Cressida and Harry never seemed very serious about each other. They ran in the same crowd after being introduced to each other by Eugenie. They seemed more like ‘hanging buddies’ in a holding pattern. Like Chelsea, Cressida was not into the OTT tabloid media attention attached to being with a high profile prince.

      OTOH, dating Harry gave Cressida name recognition, which helped in her desire to launch acting/ modeling pursuits. She was actually on the rebound from a former boyfriend, also named Harry, whom she went back to after splitting with Prince Harry within two years.

      Cressida is a younger half-sister of William’s former crush, Isabella Calthorpe, and who was never truly interested in William. In fact, none of the modern young ladies of the aristocracy were ever seriously interested in marrying the Wales bros. What happened to Diana was a red flag.

      Again, Harry was unhappy with being in the royal firm. He would have preferred to make a career in the military. But his family glommed onto him and persuaded him to retire. As has been noted also, Wm was jealous of Harry’s military successes. As we know, Harry is lucky to have found a strong, intelligent, self-made woman like Meghan. And even she was barely strong enough to survive intact the emotional and psychological abuse meted out by the firm and by the British media.

  29. Layla says:

    A true testimonial to their parenting style will be more visible in how the kids behave when they’re older. Because seeing how they’ve behaved recently (especially with regards to Harry and his family) one can only pray that the kids turn out better.

    • Jaded says:

      I can foresee them turning into spoiled monsters akin to the Grimaldis when they were younger. No matter how “hands on” and perfect a mommy she is, Kate and William are in a rocky marriage and I imagine William isn’t around nearly as much as the tabloids like to think he is. Being brought up in that kind of environment creates spoiled, out-of-touch kids that grow up like William and countless others who are the unfortunate byproduct of wealth and privilege.

  30. Dee says:

    All the right ingredients to convince British taxpayers to continue dolling out hard earned cash to pay for their prince and princess lifestyles! Ugh

  31. Over it says:

    It’s funny how William can want to have a good family life for his children and not be criticized or attack for it by him attacking the institution but when Harry says he wants to break the generational cycle of pain and suffering and be there for his children with bundles of love , well then we hear why doesn’t Harry stop attacking the queen and his wonderful supportive father.

  32. Diana says:

    You know I’m not one of those people that’s sold on the fact that they are living separate lives. But dear lord this obvious PR does make me do a side eye..

  33. Pork chops & Apple sauce says:

    “Cracking little lad”? Try “little cracker”.

  34. Lila says:

    Once again, they’re telling on themselves and confirming what we’ve all been saying for years. When it comes to these people, right = white and they’ll never forgive Harry for not having 100% white children. That’s all there is to it.

  35. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    The right ingredients for what? Are we ever served a solitary plate of saltines or marshmallows or plain pound cake? They don’t even have enough ingredients for flavorful clam chowder. Where’s the spice? The fresh herbs? There’s not a balsamic vinegar living within their earshot. They have nothing but stale pantry staples.

  36. LRob says:

    I mean this as diplomatically as royal matters deserve. Get over yourselves, BRF. You blew it; you’re a mess, and none of this self-aggrandizement is anyone’s fault but your own. Try some humble pie. Just do the work and let it speak for you.

  37. Christine says:

    I haven’t even read the article or comments yet, but holy eff, from “have all the right ingredients” I can ascertain Wills and Kate are still very much a racist family, and surrounded by idiots. Who can’t look at those five words and think they may be a bad choice for this particular duo.

  38. kelleybelle says:

    How is this even news? Of course they’re polite. They’re future royals. They might be awful in private though, the others seem to be! Slow news because the Lamebridges are on vacation for the rest of the year?

  39. Ania says:

    Mental health and early years champions… „we should talk about mental health, let’s not be ashamed! Oh but we and our children have no issues because we are so white and rich ad perfect and those are the best ingredients!” Mental problems are obviously for the poor and POC and because there is sth wrong in your family. My God they are just reinforcing stigma and stereotypes while thinking they are championing mental health… also setting their kids up for tabloid smear camaping as soon as they discover little Cambs are normal kids and are not 1000% perfect. I feel for those kids.

  40. Well Wisher says:

    Most of items listed as their perfect lives should be included as a part of their daily affirmations. I wish they would stop oversharing about their children.
    As couple yearns to be celebrated for being famous, it will behoove them to simply get Tik Tok accounts along with the already existing social accounts and become influencers.

  41. bettyrose says:

    It’s not just the Brits or RF who think like this. I used to work with a guy from an old east coast family. He was clearly not that bright, despite his ivy league degree (the fourth of his family to attend said school) and definitely downwardly mobile in his earning potential, but he liked to refer to his “pedigree” in reminding people of his superior breeding. *insert barf emoji here*

    It’s white supremacy of course because one must be white to qualify, but it’s also establishing an elitist hierarchy among white people.

  42. —> WTF is this quote? The Cambridge kids are “all very polite children,” says the family friend, “but they have a little twinkle in their eyes. They have all the right ingredients.”

    Right ingredients reads as a call out to any one who needs to believes in the myth of white superiority.

    A dog whistle.

  43. Well Wisher says:

    Duplicate submission.

  44. Monica says:

    That “twinkle in the eye” comment is desperate wishful thinking that these children will grow up to have as much charisma as their long-gone-to-better-things Aunt Meghan and Uncle Harry. If not, the monarchy is doomed. The BRF is useless except as entertainment. And they’re fast losing any vestiges of entertainment value.

  45. Debbie says:

    William is “conscious of making sure” the children have a relationship w/ their parents… Hm, my 1st thought was “That’s a lot of words.” Then, after re-reading that convoluted sentence, it seemed like William is aware of something but not necessarily actively engaged in action, just aware, or keen. My 2nd thought was after all that talk of “co-parenting” it seemed like language used about separated people, not an intact couple raising their children together.

  46. MangoAngelesque says:

    All I could hear as I read those quotes was “co-parent.” They speak of their children as though they coordinate raising as a separate couple.

    Literally the entire thing read with the exact same tone as a publicity piece about a divorced couple with children, intent on discussing how successfully they are navigating post-married life.

    • Nic919 says:

      Parents who are an actual couple and live in the same residence “parent” together. They do not co-parent which is only ever used for separated or divorced couples. Watch for that word to be edited once it is noticed.

  47. Mtec says:

    The “right ingredients.” 🤢🤮

    Yeah, white, rich, and titled is what they mean

  48. Tessa says:

    This is just PR. Children are not “always” polite, otherwise something would be wrong. This spin is irritating.

  49. Feebee says:

    I feel like the “Secrets to Surviving Royal Life” was deliberate too. If only H&M could have followed their tips on how to survive they’d still be in the UK.

  50. N0B0dy says:

    All the right ingredients for… what? baking cookies ?

    • aftershocks says:

      Yeah @Nobody. Maybe it’s the ‘right ingredients’ for that Xmas fruitcake that sweet, clueless young Georgie, in his stuffy, traditional white shirt, was enthusiastically beating during the performative photo-op after the ‘royal heirs’ portrait was taken in 2019. That was the time when the royals were reeling from the ill-conceived, boneheaded BBC Prince Andrew interview.

      At the same time, the Sussexes had smartly fled to Vancouver Island to reconnoiter, regroup, relax with Archie and close friends, while strategizing their much needed escape from the gilded cage.

      • aftershocks says:

        I’m having some trouble with posting. I had wanted to include the below in my above post:

        @Monica said:
        “That ‘twinkle in the eye’ comment is desperate wishful thinking that these children will grow up to have as much charisma as their long-gone-to-better-things Aunt Meghan and Uncle Harry.”

        Exactly! Sadly, ever since the 2019 Xmas pap-walk forced upon George and Charlotte, as fodder for the rota in absence of the Sussexes, it appears that any semblance of ‘twinkling eyes’ charisma has been drained out of the Cambridge youngsters.

        George used to have fun dancing around as a pageboy at wedding gatherings, and being hilariously mischievous with cousin Savannah on the BP balcony. Unfortunately, those days are over, as he’s now morphing into a Windsor stuffed-shirt elitist. No more enthusiastic beating of Xmas puddings. George has got to conform to royal norms, and at the same time constantly prove that ridiculous ‘right ingredients’ nonsense, all-the-while having to navigate the royal rota crosshairs.

        Good luck with that, poor Georgie Porgie puddin’ pie…

  51. Kelly says:

    I just am thinking that the whole “role” was a cheap, shit sitcom. They’re pissed that Harry and Meghan were able to get out and find a role of “service” to the world. It destroyed their whole ploy to use them as puppets. They know the monarchy is done. it’s a matter of time. POOF, the dream is over

  52. Calibration says:

    “Her motherly values are clear to see,”

    is that because she takes pics of them all the time? she has several nannies. And is that meant to be a comparison to the other duchess? Remember when they showed Archie squirming as a toddler being read duck rabbit and people used that against her, like, he HATES her!!! because sure, babies/toddlers don’t squirm ever

  53. Linney says:

    I agree with some of the other comments; what struck me was the use of the word “co-parent.” I would never say my husband was a good “co-parent.” I would say he was a great dad. “Co-parent” screams “separate households” to me. Why not say “William is a wonderful father,” or “William and Kate are terrific parents,” etc. I also think “the right ingredients” is a really strange way to describe children. “Well-raised, grounded, kind, etc.” but “right ingredients”? Who is writing this stuff? Every time some Cambridge PR comes out, it just makes the situation seem more off kilter.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Right @Linney.
      ‘Co-parenting is synonymous with divorced or estranged parents raising their kids in separate households (as other posters mentioned too, up-thread).

      And ‘the right ingredients’??? As opposed to what? The ‘wrong ingredients’??!!

  54. Cottage Cat says:

    I remember Charlotte giving the official photographers the Violet Elizabeth Bot treatment, telling them, “You’re not coming in”…far from “cute”, it was extremely rude and precocious. Her parents should have reminded her that “These people work for a living to pay their bills. Unlike us”.

  55. MsThang says:

    I thought Chutney was keen on tennis, what’s with HM doing all the stuff for Miss Emma, I thought that was Chutney’s forte!!!