Duchess Kate wore a $2420 McQueen suit & $6000 in diamonds for her busywork

I was so mad about the Duchess of Cambridge’s Keenwell Institute for Buttons and Early Years busy work yesterday, I didn’t even look up anything about her outfit. So here you go – Kate wore a “£1,420 baby pink Alexander McQueen blazer” and “matching trousers, costing an estimated £540,” per the Mail. That’s £1960 for one busywork suit. That’s $2420. For a pink pantsuit. She also wore “her pair of £3,750 Mappin & Webb ‘Empress’ Diamond Carriage Earrings and her matching £2,000 Empress Mini White Gold & Diamond Pendant Necklace.” Nearly £6000 worth of jewelry, not counting Big Blue? Excessive. Tacky.

But again, the most offensive part about all of this was the vast nothingness of Kate’s big, keen signature initiative. You know, the one she’s been working on for eleven years? This is, according to Kensington Palace’s careful PR, her life’s work. All she has to show for it is a second “survey” which gave her the same results as her haphazard Five Big Questions. Those results? That there needs to be “more awareness” of the importance of Early Years. That’s what the new Ipsos survey was for, per Vanity Fair: “the new survey is focused on gauging awareness of the importance of the early childhood years among the U.K.’s population.” The survey found, according to Ipsos’s president, “a minority of Britons recognise the unique importance of the first five years of a child’s life… This critical new research for the Royal Foundation Centre for Early Childhood provides the opportunity for society to ignite a discussion about how parents and children can be better supported during this period.” Kate’s year of Keenwell busywork is fancy new data which shows that there is an “opportunity for society to ignite a discussion” on Early Years. They needed data to support the conclusion that people need to be more aware of the importance of Early Years.

Clearly, this is all just a repeat of Pippa Tips, only it’s Keen Tips on Early Years. The new data also revealed something groundbreaking: more than 55% of respondents “recognise that future mental health is the most likely part of adult life to be affected by early years’ experience.” You’re telling me Kate commissioned a survey to learn if people think that damage, toxicity or abuse in their childhoods will affect their mental health later in life? GASP!

Once again, Kate met with actual government officials during this “roundtable discussion” on Early Years. And even after all that, notice that Kensington Palace won’t #ReleaseTheTapes. No videos of this roundtable discussion. I assume that’s because after Kate carefully posed for the photographer, she then jazz-handed her way out the door to go shopping. She couldn’t even be bothered to offer a concrete policy proposal or say “this charity/initiative is doing excellent work, I think we should all focus on fully funding this work in particular.” It’s all glossy keenery, signifying nothing.

Photos courtesy of Instar.

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

217 Responses to “Duchess Kate wore a $2420 McQueen suit & $6000 in diamonds for her busywork”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. OriginalLaLa says:

    This is insanity – that’s “research” a 4th grader would do and get a C for. I’m stunned that Britons seem ok with the huge waste of money and resources being poured into this useless mannequin’s “research center” instead of actually funding early childhood initiatives and actual research.

    I’m an actual researcher, with a PhD and everything, and when I was still in academia it was a fight to get funding for our work (especially in the social sciences!) and I would have been livid to see research dollars spent on this crap…she is such a waste of space.

    • Wilma says:

      To be fair, the government people she giggled with know nothing and wouldn’t recognize good research if it bit them.

      • kirk says:

        I watched a Royal Family Channel video of the event, why? To enjoy long close focus shots of the HRH DoC nameplate sign while she burbles something, then listen to some unidentified dude talk about funding commitments in specific programs while camera focuses on pink clad Kitty and unidentified women cuts off prior speaker to introduce the super crucial video about British public perception of early subgroup, then camera cut away to pink Kitty walking away from meeting. That’s it?

    • Nic919 says:

      Kate couldn’t even handle an undergrad psych program, which many undergrads take, because that’s how dim she is. She has no concept of how proper research is done, or that methodology matters. These polls are useless and as someone showed yesterday, the results as quoted are misinterpreted. One of the questions asks which age level is most important for mental health and one of the answers is all the age levels but kate and her crew interpret that to mean that they don’t think 0-5 is important, which is false based on that answer.

      And that’s just one example of bad methodology and interpretation.

    • Tessa says:

      Kate never had the time (she had to be around when William called) or inclination to really put time in to do anything. Serious research takes time and effort and REAL interest not superficial interest which she never put in. It is disrespectful to the individuals who really did put in the time and were serious about their studies and the topic. She looked ridiculous in the pink suit, with serious looks and saying nothing really of importance. I wish experts in the field would refute what she says, including the chart.

      • LaraK says:

        Oh, f*ck her research! Research should be done by people with masters degrees at a minimum, and preferably PhDs. What the hell kind of keen insight does she have to offer?

        Worst part is, her hideous outfit could feed a hundred of those little kids she seems to care so much about. If she really wanted to do something about early years, she would be fundraising for food banks, campaigning for affordable housing, working with single parents and parents who struggle with employment, etc.
        But that requires actual work.

        “Did you know the first five years are sooooo important?”
        B*tch please! Are you going to actually do something to help me take care of my child and improve their early years? No? K , bye!

    • dina says:

      It’s mind bogglinggggg. How is anyone in the UK ok with these absolute clowns and their useless “initiatives”?! Man.

      • AnnaKist says:

        Well, they are the same people who took an instant dislike – no, hatred – to the woman Harry fell in love with, cuz, you know, she is a temptress, spinning her deceitful web around “our Harry”, and manipulating him into marrying her, since she was damaged goods, given her “history”. She wanted the title of Princess, and when she didn’t get that, once more used her tantalizing trucks to convince Harry to ditch his family and go Stateside, depriving him of the Love and support of his loving extended family. She doesn’t love him, you know. It’s all a game to her. After all, she WAS an actress… They are disgusting people.
        And she should be ashamed, swanning about in clothes and jewels of that value, when so many “early years” children go to school without breakfast and bringing no lunch. The school where I teach is considered a “good” school, in a suburb full of McMansions, and seemingly, plenty of money to go around. We do have some public housing; built in with similar housing and difficult to identify as social housing. We have always had children coming to school hungry and bringing no lunch – and many are not from families who rely on welfare – but with the way the world is, everyone has noticed the rise in the need for extra breakfast food and dipping into the available funds for lunches for these children. She’s a fraud, playing pretend psychologist and child development expert, when she knows Sweet FA. Remind me, who is the actress?

        Already, 28 days in, our new Prime Minister has created a new position and appointed the Minister for the Republic. It will take time, but it will happen.
        I am so sorry for ranting

      • Bohemian Angel says:

        As a British citizen I am NOT okay with this or anything else this racist twit does. However, a lot of people here are either indifferent and don’t really care what she does/spends or they are royalists who don’t care what she spends and thinks she is doing good. In most British people’s eyes, she has done her job by producing heirs for the monarchy to continue, which even the most indifferent people care about. People who see her for what she is have their eyes open especially since Meghan and all the shit she went through.
        The monarchy is the heart of Britishness, it provides stability and continuity, you would be surprised by the horror on the faces of the most indifferent people when you suggest abolishing it all.
        This woman has the backing of ALL the media in the UK, plus the Tory government, she’s fine and dandy believe me. As a WOC I am sick of the ‘royals’ and the Tory government. I hope to leave this island as soon as I’m financially able to do so!
        All I say is well done Harry and Meghan for leaving that shit behind. 👍🏽

    • Moxylady says:

      The early years are important. Great.
      Where Is the initiative to make families good secure? To provide free access to excellent play based child care? To build parks in low income areas?
      Play play play play play. That’s what early childhood is about. So where is the push to support families so kids can be kids without seeing their families struggle so that they can PLAY?

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes, @ Moxylady. Where are the programs that her 7+ years of “RF for Centre for Early Foundation”? Not ONE program has been put into place for her excessive years of “research” that she claims to be spearheading.

        CopyKeen is all talk and NO action….

        My gawd, you would think she has cured cancer with their fawning over her “work”.

    • Isi says:

      It’s all so disgusting! The whole world thinks she’s special, instead she’s the dumbest, most treacherous person I know! Even the Kardashians have more in their heads! They managed to build a billion dollar empire!
      K could do and achieve so much good in the world with her reach and money, instead she only makes the world worse. It’s just incredibly sad…

      • BUBS says:

        I understand your anger but I assure you, “the whole world@ does NOT think she’s special…the majority of the world really doesn’t care about whatever this woman does. Don’t let the right wing propaganda make you believe otherwise.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Agree @BUBS. “The whole world thinks she’s special” is an outright lie. Kate, William and the Monarchy were fired LIVE on tv in Jamaica-truly a beautiful moment. Kate’s reach is limited. She doesn’t have the intellect to connect with thinking people. It’s why Meghan was such a threat. Meghan can walk the walk and talk the talk. With ease. Had to lol at a deranger that was trying to say Kate went through a harder grading system than Meghan. It IS much harder to get into Northwestern University than St. Andrews. Pretty confident the grading/graduation system is much harder at NU than St. Andrews. Northwestern is globally ranked at #24. St. Andrews is #342. An Arts History major that asked about Faberge Eggs being made anymore? L.OL And, now, we are supposed to believe she spent YEARS on a project. Funny sh*t.

      • Nic919 says:

        Outside of the UK kate is at most covered in the same magazine where they cover Jlo. The only time kate was seen on non entertainment news sections in canada recently was when Jamaica fired them on camera and so the question was whether canada needs the British monarchy as well.

        I understand the frustration of the UK people who tire of seeing this dense shallow woman propped up, but it’s only a Uk thing.

    • Gubbinal says:

      Allow me to quote from the horse’s mouth: Kate said the following in her “initiative” meeting with Dr. Jill Biden last June:

      “Actually the focus isn’t you know um sort of on on parenting itself but actually how we could give them the tools so that they are having their babies and and raising their children with these greater tools and I think that’s the way that education all the way through the system I think would be really um really powerful.”

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Oh dear, that’s even worse than I thought. She sounds like an imbecile. Yikes.

      • KFG says:

        She’s an affront to those of us who actually work in these fields and fight for resources.

      • Renae says:

        Great shades of Ivanka!
        On another note: I think she looks good in that pantsuit.
        I don’t think the jewels are overdone.
        But just HOW is this work? Looks more like a chat over lunch.

      • Deering24 says:

        “Actually the focus isn’t you know um sort of on on parenting itself but…”

        Yeesh. Da fuh is this mess? 🤬🤬 And does one really need to bling to the gills for this kind of meeting?

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Ugh! Ok so what are the tools?
        Child care? Parenting classes? Jobs? What are the tools or resources being created or distributed to young adults wanting “babies” or current parents?

        This “initiative” will be just like the rest of her life’s work. It will be phased out once people start wondering what is happening and she will get a new life’s work. This has happened already half a dozen times.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Gubbinal, that mumblization will never not be funny to me. I believe it’s Harper who painstakingly deciphered it all. Kate’s words depict little ones holding hammers and wrenches. I’ll be honest. Louis is a cute little guy. After his antics during the Jubbly, don’t want to see him handling a hammer or a wrench around people.

    • Andrew's_Nemesis says:

      We’re not okay with it. Not at all.
      I’m also an academic researcher. This makes me furious.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Are there really significant numbers of people in Britain who are not okay with shrugging and condoning the embiggening of this fool? Do you think there’s anything worthwhile that you can do to make public your complete and utter disapproval of Keen FFQC sashaying about wasting your tax money on p.r. nonsense that is helping no one, but just giving her photo ops?

    • DuchessL says:

      My kids couldve done better with the questions, analyzing the results and proposing actual initiatives. I have no idea where this is going. So her conclusion after all these years of early years research, survey, keening efforts is to recognize an opportunity to ignite a conversation? gasp what a joke.

    • Elizabeth Phillips says:

      This woman has a global reach which could truly help people, and I help more people every day doing customer service for an insurance company than she has in 11 freakin’ years.

      • Wiglet Watcher, says:

        Lol remember. First 2 years she did nothing. It was broadcasted she did nothing and everyone had to accept that so she could be a newlywed to her husband she had already dated for a decade. A husband that already had side pieces and rarely shared their newlywed home.

        P.S. remember when she abruptly moved out of that “cottage?” People said rats, but Carole was there helping her load her luggage and it was rumored William had another woman there. She had been at her parents so him bringing a woman there would have probably felt like a safe move.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Everybody involved should be embarrassed by the waste of, presumably, tax dollars that went into producing this nothingburger ‘survey’ & ‘conclusions’. Still ‘raising awareness’ where none is needed.

      • kelleybelle says:

        Yep, basically that the first five years are so important. We knew that. No shit! Next …

    • Bisynaptic says:

      @PhD, Ditto.

    • Anance says:

      At least she didn’t attend all the days of Royal Ascot, wearing ridiculous hats. Kate wore a pantsuit and carried a folder. She really cannot offer a strong opinion on anything or policy initiatives.

      She just needs to master the art of sounding serious (easy to do with a Brit-posh accent) and not say anything.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Exactly @OriginalLaLa. Total insanity. The same empty phrases repeated over and over again for embiggening photo ops, simply cuz Khatie is FFQC. Lots of tedious nonsensical Sturm und Drang. Or, to borrow from Shakespeare: Yawn-worthy ‘Early Years’ tedium “told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” MacBeth; Ch.5, Sc.5, lines 16-27.

      The biggest question is, “Why do the Brits continue to enable, acquiesce with, and invest in this utter numbskull; this freakin’ empty vessel???”

      • Wiglet Watcher, says:

        Because it’s never their personally money they’re spending on her.

        And I do not understand why they can live off taxpayers, but their personal wealth is never taxed and knowingly kept hidden.

  2. Highland pony says:

    In some places in London on average it can cost up to £14k for daycare . The cost of her outfits could easily pay for families facing hardship to find adequate care for their children.

    • TrixC says:

      £14k is on the low side for London. I live in quite an ordinary area and pay over £18k.

    • Colby says:

      This this this.

      This is my one of my major issues with the royal family. Apparently they cost each taxpayer like a pound a year, and while that’s a very small cost per taxpayer, that money could be used for so many more worthy causes.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes!! And though it may seem to be a small fraction of how much each taxpayer pays, where is their return for these grifters???

      • Harla says:

        It’s not per taxpayer, it’s per person. So everyone, even babies are included in that funding methodology.

      • minnieder says:

        Exactly. Why can’t the £1 per person be used for a social program that benefits any citizen that needs it? An account that provides housing and childcare assistance for example. The RF bums don’t need it, the people do!!!

      • MeganC says:

        Public spending in the UK is $16,368 per person, almost $4,000 more per person than in the US.

      • Nic919 says:

        The one pound per person number does not include the cost of security for them which is significant. It also does not include the amount of money the government does not collect from their massive wealth that gets passed down generations without paying estate tax.

      • Wiglet Watcher, says:

        Yes. The hidden costs well exceed 1 pound per person.
        They’ve gotten very clever at it.

    • BillionDollarBetty says:

      This will not be popular, but shouldn’t those planning to be parents look into the costs of raising a child before procreating? I’d love a new BMW, but I can’t afford one and don’t expect others to subsidize my “wants.” I understand and empathize with those who are thrust into financial hardships due to loss of a partner or job. But I also see a lot of people who can’t afford the basics popping out kids.

      • KFG says:

        You’re acting as though any of these royals can afford children or that people intended to fall on hard times mainly caused by horrible government policies. Oh and there is the issue of readily accessible birth control and abortion. The other thing is that most countries aren’t sustainable without people having children. A BMW is a luxury, children shouldn’t be.

      • MeganC says:

        Suggesting means testing to determine who can and cannot procreate is anti-choice, racist, and classist. So, yes, it’s a very unpopular position.

      • Honey says:

        Yeah, I say the same about people who get sick with life threatening diseases. Why are you carrying on in sickness when you know you can’t afford if? 🙄 Stop it. You’re not being rational.

        I get it. I do. However, with that thought process, you are basically stating that people under a certain income cap shouldn’t have children at all—when you carry the thought out. Also, that the child-free / childless (people like me) shouldn’t contribute tax money to schools or anything that benefit children since we don’t have any (which is cool with me). However, I don’t think an ethical society should “allow” the lack of money or financial planning to be the only lens to view the decision to have children. There are just too many issues around pay, discrimination, and inequality for that. I won’t even get into a discussion around the access to abortion & the right to determine that.

        Anyway, IMHO, there are way more intrinsic values that should be included or considered in the decision-making process when it comes to becoming a parent than it simply coming down to dollar and cents. We’re talking people not an overly expensive purchase.

      • LaurieLee says:

        Wow, there are many ways to respond to this, but I’ll just say, there’s not greater interest to society for you having a BMW, thus no one is going to help you fund it. There is however, a great public interest for people to keep having new people to replace themselves in the workforce. If the only people for whom raising a child isn’t a financial burden had kids, we’d very shortly run out of people to work in basically every job. Society would literally collapse. Thus we need people to have kids, and thus the government should help people be able to afford to have them and to raise them into decent human beings. That means making sure childcare, healthcare, and education is at a price all can afford so that our society is filled with healthy, educated people who were raised in homes where their parents weren’t suffering the stresses and humiliations of living hand to mouth.

      • Still In My Robe says:

        At the risk that I might be responding to a troll, what budget exactly are you talking about? A BMW is a fixed cost with known maintenance over time. My husband and I do well financially. We decided to have a third child, knowing full well at that point the cost of daycare, annual preventative medical care, clothing, diapers, etc. for a child. We could afford both a standard delivery and a c-section—out of pocket, if it came to that. My third child was born in an emergency c-section with a congenital condition that none of the fifteen ultrasounds during my pregnancy spotted (I was being monitored for placenta previa.). My daughter’s first week of life cost $100K. No one but multi-multi-millionaires has that kind of cash on hand.

        You’re dealt the hand you’re dealt. Society at-large does not benefit from families falling into in poverty or children being raised in poverty.

      • BillionDollarBetty says:

        An unpopular opinion does not (necessarily) a troll make, so thank you to those who thoughtfully responded. Responding to as many comments as I can remember in no particular order…
        I absolutely agree about having legal, affordable, accessible, and non-stigmatized birth control & abortion available.
        I absolutely agree that investing in children is a societal good.
        I absolutely agree that being a good parent has many more facets than financials.
        Obviously, as there are, what, 8 billion people on earth, my opinion is the minority, but I still feel children are a luxury (of money, time, emotional stability, etc) and that is not classist, racist, or whatever other flame labels you want to toss out. I get what you might be trying to imply and understand systemic inequities affect a person’s ability to provide for a family. I don’t have answer for that. It’s much more discussion than we can meaningfully address here. At the end of the day, I don’t think it’s fair for anyone – royals or peasants – to expect others to subsidize their brood .

      • MeganC says:

        Public programs ensure the well being of everyone in a society. It’s why we pay taxes. Suggesting you don’t want to “subsidize” someone else’s brood shows what kind of person you are.

      • Deering24 says:

        @Billion–Dunno whether you’ve noticed, but the cost of just about everything over the past twenty years has gone up exponentially–way beyond what most prospective parents allowed for–or could afford. As well, jobs are barely paying cost-of-living for one person, and companies aren’t rushing to change that. One would have to be psychic to accurately predict what the econony is going through–and even then unexpected expenses can wreck any planned budget. Even economists don’t agree on how the future will play out–but you are demanding that parents be more prescient than they are? Really? And people who already have kids–should they go back in time and not have them? As for subsidizing, why should I be happy the goverment keeps shelling out my taxes so you can drive your BMW where I don’t even live? You see how this works?

      • aftershocks says:

        @BillionDollarBetty, of course you’re entitled to your perceptions and your opinions. However, others are pointing out a number of factors involved in human existence, which refutes your not well thought out claim that having children is a ‘luxury,’ or simply a choice that everyone makes with careful forethought and judicious thinking.

        Having children is NOT a luxury simply because it’s expensive to carry, bear, and raise a child in our current global culture. Nope, having children is a huge responsibility. In many ways it’s often considered a gift, or a miracle. Having children requires enormous sacrifices and complete dedication, which some people are aware of and equipped to handle, while others are not, for any number of reasons.

        There are a variety of human situations in which women end up becoming pregnant, without any intention — situations that are too numerous to get into. Our female ancestors often had no choice in the matter whatsoever, and many women died in childbirth.

        In no way should having children be compared to purchasing luxury goods.

  3. blackfemmebot says:

    What a waste of a global platform. What a waste of a person.

    • XOXO says:

      She’s a g*rbage person. Her right eye is dropping from all that Botox, which is a common side effect, yet they tell us she has never used it. Gross lot.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Yeah, all that drooping in her right eye is so noticeable. Plus, her eyes look so empty and dead. Living with herself and her choices must on some level, be an absolute nightmare. So the endless shopping and royal status perks may be pacifying and addictive. Copy-keening is likely also a pleasurable, and/ or habitual distraction tool. Plus, the deadening of her true emotions is necessary, especially in public.

    • Well Wishers says:

      If it helps, not a lot of people are actually paying attention to what she says. It is more of the same, what she wears. This is another display of Kate’s version of what a future Queen does.
      I deliberately used the word Queen, not QC.
      Kate and her media arm, the Fail 📰 is of the opinion that everything is replaceable, instead the beginning of a new reality.
      With time, she would be rudely awaken to the fact that this is a lost opportunity since as an empty suit, she cannot replace Prince Philip and when the 🕙 comes, Camilla. She should have spent some time becoming self aware and pursue her passions.
      The problem seems to be that it is nothing beyond dressing up to create an illusion.
      Since she has fame, money and status why is she hellbent in being reduced to be a mere consumer?
      Marie Antoinette was a out-of-touch child bride, married to a teenage king but Kate is a 40 year old?
      What is her excuse?
      Why is she being indulged, by Boris government and tabloid Fail, since she uses the chance to piss away her soft power?
      The last question was asked and answered.
      Her soft power is being used to subsidie the downward diminishing profit margins of the tabloid press and a weapon of mass distraction/ distruction for highly disliked govt.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ @Well Wishers: “Why is she being indulged…”

        Another obvious answer is that Khate is considered to be white (English rose), and thus she’s more acceptable, especially in comparison to Meghan. Albeit that aristos (Turnip Toffs) will never completely and fully accept Khate due to the ingrained British class system.

        As long as Khatie Keen retains her current royal status as wifey to Wills, she’ll continue to be indulged and embiggened.

  4. Merricat says:

    The only thing that Kate’s Early Years “work” shows is that she continues to expect adulation for nothing. I can’t believe how much the public is willing to pay for this hat rack.

    • Chloe says:

      The only things she repeats over and over again is that the forst 5 years are crucial. Okay girl, so what are we going to do with that info?

      Ps. That ipsos research was a joke too.

      • Ginger says:

        Exactly. Her ten years of “listening and learning” have said this and she has done nothing about it. She just keeps repeating it over and over. I bet this
        “meeting” lasted 10 minutes. Enough to get her photos and then be done.

    • Hic says:

      The DF had pictures of some of the guests papers. The Minster of Health had blank sheets while KK had stacks with information on it. Very clear the guests learned nothing from this meeting

      • WHAT says:

        There’s video. Daily fail uploaded a highly edited version of the discussion. It’s also on the royal
        Family channel.
        On it, Kate is essentially reading the notes verbatim. It comes across as she’s reading a speech to everyone
        There’s no passion or conviction in her voice to show she knows what she’s talking about. The quick clip shows her constantly looking down at the script and it comes across as a speech and not a discussion. The guy with the mustache says well let me be quiet the duchess will make opening remarks
        She looks down at her notes and reads thank you for coming out I want to begin with opening remarks. ☹️A box of rocks just to be on par with Meghan for the visit during Invictus if someone can put a link in about the video. You can clearly see she knows nothing about the topic

      • BeanieBean says:

        I mentioned that yesterday. The guy to her left introduces her because she has some opening remarks, then she herself says she wants to make opening remarks. She can’t even self-edit that very tiny thing! Pitiful. This empress has no clothes.

  5. L84Tea says:

    She just had to have something where she could look smart and important and wear a blazer while doing it. Another day, another photo op for Waity.

    • Becks1 says:

      But doesn’t she have almost this exact same suit in a few different colors? I’m thinking of the white one she wore on the Flop Tour, and the salmon color one from the stock photo “office” pics. So it’s worse than just needing to look smart and important. She also needed to spend more money to remind everyone of her status.

      • L84Tea says:

        Yup, even the jewelry says it. If there ever was a moment or outfit for very simple, understated jewelry, this was it. While this set is understated, it’s still covered in diamonds. But Kate’s gotta flaunt.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        It was reported early on that Anne disliked Kate. Reason being she’s “very grand” and would over dress and wear jewels for casual, private family gatherings. She expected the OTT royal life of balls and gowns.

      • Laura D says:

        @wiglet watcher
        I always felt that Business Barbie and Mrs Bennett got all their information about royalty (and the aristocracy) from Downton Abbey and acted accordingly – hence her grand approach to the normal every day living . I feel William (for the most part) goes along with it because he’s been raised to believe he’s special.

        This works for them behind the palace gates but, when it’s applied to commonwealth tours they are quickly reminded those days are long gone. People expect a lot more than a member of the BRF to turn up, grace them with their presence and move on for the next photo shoot. If William and Business Barbie are serious about modernising the monarchy, they have to start rolling up their sleeves and getting their hands dirty.

      • L84Tea says:

        @Laura D, Business Barbie!! I can’t unsee it now! All she needs is the hat, a briefcase, and maybe a pink corvette, and it’s her!

      • Laura D says:

        I wish I could claim the credit but, Cinders used the name first. I must be honest I almost spate my drink over the keyboard when I first read the post.

        Business Barbie is simply a brilliant description for Kate when she’s playing at being a high-flying business woman. 😆 😆 😆

      • Lady D says:

        You forgot, Laura D, they also grace the Commonwealth members with a priceless picture of themselves. I mean they don’t give those to just anybody.

  6. Chloe says:

    I still don’t understand the point of the research center. It’s been a year since the launch and since then she’s only been repeating the same talking points. When are we actually going to get something groundbreaking? Is she going to start a learning program? After school activities for working parents that can’t afford a babysitter? Free meals for the children that live in poverty?

    • Snuffles says:

      The research center is most likely a money laundering scheme.

      • Chloe says:

        I don’t know if its particularly the research center but i too have been thinking that something shady is going on with the royal foundation’s finances

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        The royal foundation is beyond shady.
        That Meghan and Harry did not want their charities fundraising to go into it says a lot.
        M&H fundraising goes straight to charity.
        W&K have had a few charities they fundraiser for close their doors from lack of funds.
        That should tell you everything.

        The RF creates more overhead. Less for charities. And no one has clear numbers on how.

      • windyriver says:

        It was previously reported around the end of March that Amanda Berry, BAFTA CEO, had been appointed as the new head of the Royal Foundation.

        I don’t know if that’s still true, as the BAFTA website still has her listed as CEO, and there’s an article there from December saying she’ll be stepping down in 2023, after 20+ years. In any event, hiring her for the Royal Foundation (or even having made an offer) will not have come cheap.

        The previous head of the Foundation was Jason Knauf. Draw your own conclusions.

      • First comment says:

        There was a comment to the yesterday post regarding the meeting from xtina@ who mentioned that for this kind of research IPSOS is likely charging 35k-65k. I guess the royal foundation covers this. Why don’t they actually do something for the children instead of paying for this ridiculous research which only shows things that we all know? It’s weird…

    • Hic says:

      Queens Max, Let and Mary are pros at this stuff.Forgetting they had real jobs before marrying into royalty

  7. Jan says:

    That case she is carrying looks familiar, where did I see it?
    It’s coming to me, got it, Archie’s dad was on it.
    Some one photoshopped Unable’s neck on to Meghan’s face, what will it be next.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Kate’s is a Smythson, Mara collection, so that’s about a thousand bucks. And try as I might, I didn’t see any personalization; bummer for her, I guess.

  8. ohrhilly says:

    This reminds me of Steel Magnolias. “I’m wearing blush and bashful!” I don’t hate it but it’s a lot of pink. Her shoes always look too small.

    • Betsy says:

      As far as Kate’s outfits go, I like this one and could actually see myself wearing it. It follows Elizabeth’s head to toe monocolor look, although I understand that was to stand out among crowds.

  9. My opinion says:

    Her eyes are so weird now, one is shut almost while the other is in the constant state of surprised look. Keeny really gotta lay off the fillers and Botox.

  10. Elaine says:

    Honestly. This isn’t even the basics of research. Like the first thing you do after developing a question is a literature search, so, you know, you can find out if someone’s done this work ahead of time. She’s worst than useless.

    • Nic919 says:

      It’s clear that whatever she did in the eight years she claims to have worked on this wasn’t related to actual research.
      I agree doing a literature search is the first step and it’s something that you are told to do in the first year psychology course that most undergrads have taken. Kate couldn’t even do that properly. Acting like Dr. Spock doesn’t exist is just bizarrely foolish. They are using North Korean levels of propaganda to prop this waste of money.

  11. Amy Bee says:

    I mean she didn’t need to do a survey to find out whether children who live in toxic households have mental health issues later on. She’s married to a prime example of someone who lived that life.

  12. Esmerelda says:

    “You’re telling me Kate commissioned a survey to learn if people think that damage, toxicity or abuse in their childhoods will affect their mental health later in life? GASP!”

    I know we’re making fun of Keen’s busywork, and I do hate her for trivializing a serious issue, but please, as a former abused child, let’s not repeat Keen’s mistake here. Let’s not trivialize this issue.
    I read the static above and I immediately thought about the other 45% – that’s an alarming statistic! And in Kate “let’s all pretend to be happy” world, of course, no one cares.

    • HeatherC says:

      The result isn’t being trivialized. It’s that this result has been known. And yet she commissioned a survey and “worked” on it for ten years or so. That’s what’s being mocked.

  13. Athena says:

    There’s a three minute video on the royal family channel on YouTube of her mumbling and looking bored during the meeting

    • Alexandria says:

      I read the summary posted yesterday cos I sure as hell won’t watch it (thank you!). If her team is reading this, for God’s sake take her and taxpayers out of this misery and change her focus to sports for girls and women.

  14. Harper says:

    Sadly, there was video of this train wreck on the Fail yesterday, and its entertainment value was high. Awkward, stilted greetings between Kate and her fellow panelists. I don’t know what was funnier, the looks on her fellow panelists’ faces when Kate thanked them for taking time out of their busy schedules to meet with her (because you know they knew this was a waste of their morning and probably had to be promised something in return) or Kate reading her prepared comments line by line as if it was the first time she looked at them. Then there was also a zoom in on her bored, drifting off expression while other “panelists” spoke.

    I think the new KP comms guy said, “What’s this Early Childhood Center that you rolled out to great fanfare a year ago but have done nothing with since?” And Kate said, oh drat. I guess we should perform for the public in that regard sometime soon before Wimbledon. Only can we make it fancy like Meghan’s NYC visit? So they added government people.

  15. Seraphina says:

    I agree with other commenters, what a waste of a platform. And from the looks of some pics, she seems quite pleased with herself. That’s the sad part. I do believe she believes she is doing a stellar job.
    And in this day and age, when jewels and outfits are easily IDed and priced – why advertise the throwing away of money on that when she could be giving more to those who so desperately need it.

  16. Moira's Rose's Garden says:

    She is such a waste of space & oxygen.

  17. Becks1 says:

    I find it interesting that the Fail is reporting on the cost of her clothes again, especially the jewelry, since I don’t think any of that is new. It’s like when they price out Meghan’s outfit and always include her Cartier watch (although I don’t think they included Kate’s here but you get my overall point). They’re being snarky.

    • Nic919 says:

      When they were targeting Meghan they tended to avoid providing any numbers for what kate wore. But it seems they are going back to providing numbers and including the costs of jewelry is interesting too since they do not do that very often for Kate at all.

      Someone finds this busy work annoying. I guess business Barbie doesn’t play well for everyone.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Tides are definitely turning. Even the DM now leaves a lot of negative comments up about the Cams.

        I wonder if there was a drop in protection from Charles or the RR is going rouge because no one is providing them with MH gossip?

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, very interesting. There was a kind of finality to H&M’s leaving of the Jubbly, like there was no more room for speculation about what they would do and how the royals would react. So now, the BM have to turn to the royals they have left. Of course, that will change whenever Harry’s memoir comes out.

  18. Maxine Branch says:

    Who wears a pink pantsuit to a professional meeting? Beyond the pantsuit, this is a pathetic attempt at relevance and work. Years of curated research has been done on the early years by seasoned professionals with academic degrees. I have a degree in Early Childhood Education and spent years working with fellow professionals in this area. Sad to see how someone who can barely articulate a coherent sentence is insulting this critical area with her nonsense.

    • MY3CENTS says:

      But that’s how the Royals just roll isn’t it? Sweeping in to take all the credit with no real work. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      You dress up a poor product with flashy packaging. Because the product itself won’t be great.
      A great product can come in a paper bag because it’s of value.

      Kate is all flashy because there’s nothing inside.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Yes! Who wears this to an meeting with those who must take the time from their extremely busy work and she shows up wear a PINK pantsuit??


    • TeamAwesome says:

      I mean, I also have education degrees and I would 100% show up to a professional meeting in a pink pantsuit. Not one that cost that much, but absolutely yes to pink. There are many things to criticize here, but the color of the suit didn’t make my list.

      • Gillysirl says:

        pink pantsuit wouldn’t even get a mention if it wasn’t for the cost and that she’s dripping in diamonds. I don’t live in the UK so maybe it’s normal there to go out to work meetings with dangly diamond earrings?

  19. Tessa says:

    I would not have put it past her to talk about her being “broody” and adoring babies– at this event.

  20. Tessa says:

    Kate had so much time on her hands in the run up to the ring, she had one very sporadic part time job that lasted less than a year and was all “talk” she was going to create a baby clothes line that never materializes. If she were so “passionate” about this topic, she could have enrolled in a Child Psychology course and gotten an advanced degree. I doubt money to pay for it would have been a problem (her parents could have paid) but she could not put in the time during the run up to the wedding, dealing with breakups and photo ops to win back William.

    • LaurieLee says:

      Wow, designing a baby clothes line where all the proceeds went to charity is a brilliant idea for Kate! She could even do some of the publicity photography for the clothes, and hire models from underprivileged families. They should have totally pursued this!

      • BeanieBean says:

        This was well over ten years ago when she allegedly worked for the family business. Her parents would have been setting up her own line for her, just as they set James up with that cake line & Pippa with the blog. Kate couldn’t even follow through on this big fat gift of a job.

  21. C says:

    Only 3,000 likes so far? Not even their fans care about them, lol.

  22. MY3CENTS says:

    I had a “professional office working” barbie in the 80s with that outfit.
    That Barbie could probably hold a better conversation than Dolittle Mcbuttons.

    • Nic919 says:

      I had the office Barbie play set too. I think the only difference was that it was a pink skirt and not a pantsuit.

      • Jenny says:

        Lol. Office Barbie with the optional Trophy Wife Ostentatious Jewelry pack. Katie only cares about what the photos show. These will be recycled many times to show her “at work”.

    • SIde Eye says:

      Perfect comment! Lol I remember that Barbie!

  23. MellyMel says:

    What is the actual point of all of this?!

    • nutella toast says:

      ….is there someone that DIDN’T think the first 5 years were important??? Seriously…anyone that doesn’t know that shouldn’t be a parent. It’s that obvious.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      The is, and always has been, to make Kate look good – nothing more and nothing less.

      • kelleybelle says:

        Exactly, only to make Kate look good. The “This has been ten years in the making” was a blatant Tominey lie. Meghan was on fire when she joined the family and this was hastily cobbled together in a panic because Kate was looking like the lazy nothing she really is. “Duchess has finally found her voice and will use it for the children.” I rolled my eyes so hard I think I broke something.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Spot on. Meghan’s completed project sent the Kate Panic in the Palace bells ringing. Ipsos was paid to conduct the 5 question survey and other? research-that reads a lot like the results from the Nov. 2020 survey results. Nothing new. Cobbling together from the other post along with this one, The Royal Foundation Centre for Early Childhood(Kate) is being credited for ‘the findings’ while Ipsos did the work (regardless of how bad it is). It sounds an awful a lot like contract cheating. Wonder if she practiced that at St. Andrews? Chasing after/being available for William had to be time consuming.

        LOL at the People mag post at the bottom where it said Ipsos research came up with the same percentage of 70% ‘like Kate’. No sh$t. Kate’s 70% came from Ipsos. Curious how that works? /s

      • kelleybelle says:

        @ Agreatreckoning: exactly. They panicked and threw something together … and did a lousy, see-through job of it too. They also know Kate relates better to children. She doesn’t have the intellect or experience to work with adults. Something like Ivanka Trump. Too much air in the head.

  24. Chaine says:

    So. Much. Awkward. Posing. Some of these shots are straight out of 1970s Sears catalog ads!

  25. Digital Unicorn says:

    I like the outfit, and yes the shoes/hair too but her makeup is terrible.

    As for the event I have nothing else to add that hasn’t already been said by other commenters.

  26. CC says:

    The press releases make it seem like they’ll just keep surveying people until 100% of respondents agree, and then they can say “We did it!” and close up shop.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Oh, my, now that you mention it, I think that is a distinct possibility. ‘Raising awareness’ seems to be the stated goal.

  27. Finny says:

    I used to have a similar suit in a blueberry color from Macys. It cost me $400 and I wore the heck out of it in different ways. For the love of flying fish sticks what is this woman doing all day besides exercising, vacationing, and shopping? She has no motivation nor interest to really get involved in something meaningful. I can’t even imagine what a conversation with her looks like. These poor participants having to listen to her spouting platitudes.

    It is really sad when you are a 40 year old woman and have nothing meaningful going on in your life. What a boring and empty existence.

    • Deering24 says:

      And this is what happens when you are raised that your complete worth is in being a show pony. Kate has never been taught to have a purpose outside of princess cosplay.

  28. Hyperbolme says:

    This is the best I have seen Kate look in years, I think. The suit is simple, flattering, fits perfectly and the color looks surprisingly nice. That said, her busywork is an insult to everyone. I can’t believe this is something she isn’t mortified by putting in front of the public.

    • Krista says:

      I like her better in this colour than in the “Cambridge blue” she keeps ramming down our throats.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Heck, I guess she should look halfway decent, what with all the time and money she spends on buying, primping, preening, exercising, copy-keening, and other physical, public-facing superficialities. That said, Khate still has no authenticity, much less any personal sense of style.

  29. Eurydice says:

    What does this even mean – “despite what the science is now telling us, we know that only a minority of people understand the critical importance of the first five years of a child’s life.” The reason they know that people don’t understand is because of the science, not despite it.

    I know what they’re trying to say, but it would help if someone there knew how to construct a meaningful sentence.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      English is not my first language, but I’m pretty good at it. But every so often a sentence comes along. I read it several times. And my brain hurts from the confusion. This is that sentence.

    • Nic919 says:

      That isn’t even a factual statement based on the results of her own survey. The answers revealed that many respondents believe that all years of childhood are important for mental health and not just 0-5. But someone at KP misinterpreted that to mean they didn’t believe that 0-5 was important, which is not what that answer states at all.

      And all this because of the poor methodology of the survey and dimwits interpreting it.

      • Eurydice says:

        In a way, it is factual (assuming the survey as fact) because what it’s saying is that the “science” shows a majority of the people do understand the importance – it’s just that Kate and her team of researchers “know” the opposite, despite what her survey tells them. I can’t speak for the methodology of the survey, but I know stupid writing when I see it.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I thought the science being referred to was that in neurobiology that indicates just how very crucial the first five years are in a person’s life. Katie Keen has supposedly been reading neuroscience journals. That sentence is just an example of how shoddy this–whatever ‘this’ is–is; the public shouldn’t have to guess at the meaning of what’s being said. The whole point to PR for projects like this is making it meaningful to the average person. They can’t even do that.

  30. Hyperbolme says:

    This is the best I have seen Kate look in years, I think. The suit is simple, flattering, fits perfectly and the color looks surprisingly nice on her.

    That said, her busywork is an insult to everyone. I can’t believe this is something she isn’t mortified by putting in front of the public.

  31. Hyperbolme says:

    This is the best I have seen Kate look in years, I think. The suit is simple, flattering, fits well, and the color looks surprisingly nice on her.

    That said, her busywork is an insult to everyone. I can’t believe this is something she isn’t mortified by putting in front of the public.

    • Tessa says:

      The thing is articles about Kate are about what she wears. nothing of substance. ANd it shows that she is wealthy and privileged and can afford expensive clothes unlike the average person there. Her jewelry could pay rent money for a month or two.

  32. Cortney says:

    I like this outfit 🤷🏼‍♀️

    • BeanieBean says:

      But she’s got at least one other pink pantsuit; this seems more wasteful spending along the lines of multiple blue coat dresses.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ I haven’t seen anyone particularly disliking Khate’s outfit in this instance. There have been a number remarks about her usual copy-keening, and the high cost of her jewelry on display. Plus, the clothes and jewels are sadly being worn by an empty vessel.

    • Wiglet Watcher, says:

      Sure. Suits look great on mannequins and Kate is so thin most well tailored clothes look nice on her.
      And…? What about what she is there for? What she contributes?

      Let’s treat people by what value they bring to the table and not by how they dress and look. Let our society do better than liking someone because of presentation and not substance.

  33. Jais says:

    Real question. Kate presented these findings to politicians in hopes that these politicians will do what…invest in an early years program? Is something supposed to happen beyond this meeting?

    • Snuffles says:

      No, you’re supposed to look at the pretty (photoshopped) pictures, and be satisfied that Kate is “working hard.” Don’t expect tangible outcomes, silly!

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      Did she come with a proposal? Did she come looking to join something?
      Or did she just dress up and get pics taken?

      She was once all about mental health. Why is mental health no her focus along with “arly yars?”

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Kate’s entire public life is about photo ops, nothing else. Because that would require actual work and she she doesn’t do “work”.

  34. Haylie says:

    Why do Alexander McQueen suits always look so cheap?

    • Rmcgrudiva says:

      You know, until they said it was McQueen, I seriously thought it was from Zara. I can’t believe this came out of the McQueen fashion house.

  35. SIde Eye says:

    Never thought I would say this. I like this outfit. The color is great. Now for the bad, I don’t like this outfit for a business meeting. Funny how they aren’t producing the videos, because they rival Ivanka inserting herself unwanted or uninvited in a discussion among world leaders – the expressions on their faces was a giant collective sigh and an internal massive eye roll. Kate is having the same effect. I agree it’s interesting that the Fail is reporting the cost of her clothes – Kate must be on her way out. The tide has turned on her. Before when Meghan was there they gave the White Duchess a pass and the focus was how dare a Black woman have nice things that she earned? Ha ha Meghan is no longer here for the racist garbage they are spewing. Congrats Kate, you wanted the spotlight, and now you have it. In the pic where she is smiling, she channels Vanessa Marcil (I don’t say that as an insult, Vanessa is a beautiful woman). My point is she has had so many fillers she doesn’t even look like herself anymore. In the header pic something is going on with her face. She really needs to chill with the fillers.

  36. WiththeAmerican says:

    This reminds me of trump and republicans who pretend they’re doing something with a chart behind them. Remember trumps press secretary’s empty binders. This crap only works on the stupid.

    That said, pink is her color. So much better than the blue she always wears. Why she can’t do pink blazer with different color pants I don’t know. Or different color shoe. Why her jewelry always costs a lot but is wrong. I don’t know.

    She will just never have effortless style and grace.

  37. mazzie says:

    I’m not mad about the suit. It actually suits her better than most of her wardrobe because she has the body shape for trousers. I do find suede shoes in summer odd as they’ve always been more of a fall/winter shoe.

  38. Relly says:

    1) when I first saw the necklace, I legit thought it was a diamond-encrusted button. I thought, wow, we thought we were kidding about her loving buttons, but no, she’s got jewelry about how much she loves them …

    2) in the one pic where she’s smiling huge she looks like a small child announcing I DID IT ALL BY MYSELF LOOK

  39. MsIam says:

    This pink pantsuit is dreadful plus the pants are ill fitting. She needs to check out Kamala, Hillary and Nancy’s pantsuit game if that’s the vibe she’s going for. Personally I prefer business separates, I think they look more modern.

    • BeanieBean says:

      The pants seemed a little long in the crotch to me. Not a look I care for.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Will should consider using Kate’s tailor. It would be a humanitarian act.

  40. esline mills says:

    It occurs to me that the only person who wasn’t aware of that fact, is the Duchess herself.

  41. SarahCS says:

    Conspiracy theory of the day:
    “provides the opportunity for society to ignite a discussion”
    is 100% tory policy. It is OUR responsibility to sort this out, not the government’s, that’s their position. It’s all about individualism like when they ditched all the covid restrictions as omicron was surging and told us to do what we thought was right but it’s out of their hands.

    She’s promoting the tory agenda and that’s why she got the photoshoot with people who have far more important things to do with their time (obviously dealing with the myriad issues affecting children is incredibly important but that’s not what this was about).

  42. Southern Fried says:

    Kate’s a simpleton, unaware of how ignorant she is, so easily deceived. If this is work of their new PR person, lol, good luck buddy. If she weren’t so vindictive it would be sad. Her “life’s work” isn’t funny seeing how ill informed, and wasteful it all turns out to be. How commoners put up with this utter nonsense is confounding considering the problems they’re facing now.

    • Sid says:

      When you really think about it, it really is staggering how basic and simple she is. It’s like she doesn’t care about anything and is happy to float along until she (maybe) gets the Queen Consort title. She could have easily used one of her alleged real interests like tennis or some other sport as the foundation for real work. But apparently even that is too much.

      • Blithe says:

        Unless it’s not an actual interest, she could capitalize on her degree and focus on art and even arts education. Imagine having an art history degree and living with (the owner of) what’s reputed to be the largest private art collection in the world! I’m drooling at the thought of having proximity like that, and I’m sure I can’t even imagine what that collection holds.

        Echoing you, Sid: But apparently, even that is too much.

        It’s hard for me to get having opportunities and access to do pretty much anything— and choosing nothing.

    • Well Wisher says:

      Only 23% believes what the Fail publishes, I suspect that they are unaware of anything other than she spends copious amounts of 💰 trivally.

    • Well Wisher says:

      Only 23% believes what the Fail publishes, I suspect that they are unaware of anything other than she spends copious amounts of 💰 trivally.

  43. Blithe says:

    I actually like the outfit — even the jewelry, although I think she’d look better if she switched out the pants for something darker: navy, grey, or even black. And her hair looks normal. Maybe I’m tainted by the pictures of those Ascot dresses, but: Full points for this one.

    • CrystalBall says:

      It’s not about whether it is a nice suit or not, or whether she looks good in pink or not. She wore baby pink to represent the Early Years. The problem is that she wasn’t hosting a meeting with a bunch of babies she needed to woo, but with top tier politicians, such as the minister of health. It was a BUSINESS MEETING and you don’t wear baby pink from head to toe to a business meeting unless you are a walking talking Barbie doll, hoping to catch Ken’s eye while you pretend to care about the disadvantaged. She is beyond inappropriate – and that will never change.

      • Blithe says:

        Maybe YOU don’t wear pink to a business meeting—and that’s fine. I’ll reserve my opinion re: the outfit’s appropriateness until I see what the other people at the meeting wore. So far I see a dress covered with dots and a plaid shirt with a bow tie, so, clearly standards are at least somewhat flexible.

        “Top tier politicians” manage to have “BUSINESS MEETINGS “ with Boris Johnson’s hair — yet another suggestion that the standards that Kate and her team are most familiar with are, again, at least somewhat flexible.

      • Nic919 says:

        Professional women with actual credentials can wear a pink suit and be taken seriously. Mostly because they aren’t posing for photos when they attend business meetings. And they have actual jobs and didn’t spend years chasing a husband and shopping.

        Kate acts like business Barbie with no concept of what she is saying and spends more time posing than anything of substance so adding a more substantial colour is necessary because she lacks the intellectual and professional heft to carry off this all pink look and be considered a serious person.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Blithe, the polka dot dress is navy blue with small white polka dots and the suit the man with the plaid shirt and bowtie is wearing is also a dark color. Therein lies the difference. If she had worn a dark suit with a pink blouse it would give her an entirely different look and feel.

      • Blithe says:

        Nic919 may have pinpointed one of my blind spots. Saucy&Sassy, I agree with you that a dark suit with a pink blouse would have had a different, more traditional feel. My personal preference would be to keep the jacket and blouse and add navy pants. BUT: I realize reading through the comments that I’m imagining Kate’s outfit in the settings that I’m used to — with, as Nic919 put it, “ professional women with actual credentials “. I now get that the impact of this — or ANY — outfit might be very different on Kate, with all that she brings and doesn’t bring to the table.

        I also now get that I am deeply missing the heavy sueded silk deep pink blazer that I gave away a few decades ago. (Usually worn with a black knit silk mock neck sweater, black wool pants, and black jodhpur boots or loafers.)

  44. Lululu says:

    Not the worst outfit she’s ever worn, but it looks like something I could pick up at Macy’s for $150. Also, something Meghan wouldn’t be caught dead in. Again.

    • Mrs. Smith says:

      You can, in fact, pick up a nearly identical suit w/off-white shell at JCPenneys today. I popped in for some cheap tank tops and saw the suit on the rack in the Worthington section. Same pukey pink color, high waist pants and basic jacket. Haha—they styled it better than she is wearing it, layering large pearl and gold necklaces. Just some fun jewelry made it SO much more than a very basic suit.

  45. usavgjoe says:

    Kate’s fiasco, reminds me of a time in my career when my fortune 500 employer CEO’s son (who was dumb as a tack) was explaining to our department his “Big Idea.” We spent that whole meeting pinching ourselves — and each other so no one would fall out on the floor laughing uncontrollably. That was one of the biggest test in my whole career.

  46. C says:

    And now we are officially in Bizarro World because William is speaking out against the January 6 attempted coup. What is going on inside the heads of the Cambridges??

    • Blithe says:

      Perhaps the Cambridges are wondering if they might be next?
      If William is making public comments about international political matters, and Kate’s working hard to show her value in a political area, it suggests, to me at least, that they’re jockeying for power, or protection, or both.

      I’m wondering what Sue Townsend would make of this.

  47. DeluxeDuckling says:

    Wow that second KP tweet is illiterate.

  48. tamsin says:

    1. Who is actually doing the research at this so-called foundation? Why aren’t there names and faces attached to this organization doing the work? Are they trying to give the impression that Kate herself is doing all this work? Is this meeting taking place in the Kensington Palace library?
    2. How many times can Kate convene meetings to announce that early childhood is important and not enough people know about it? Should they not at least announce an initiative to educate more people about it at least?
    3. This shows that royal staffs don’t know how to get meaningful initiatives off the ground. They only know how to do photo ops. Charles’s foundations get work done because he drives it with ideas and hires the right people. Even the Queen doesn’t have anyone who can help her go beyond her constitutional duty and waving and smiling.
    4. I like Kate’s jewelry. I think she started out liking delicate pieces. These are remarkably like Meghan’s Birks and Cartier pieces- same sensibility. And I see she’s taken to carrying a portfolio case instead of a binder.

    • Blithe says:

      Re: 1. There is no way that anyone with a serious research career would want their name associated with this. If Kate and her team actually consulted with anyone at any point, I’m sure that those people were happy to remain anonymous — just as she might be happy to take credit.

      As an aside, as a student, I read British theorists like Winnicott , Anna Freud, and even A.S. Neill. I’ve been surprised that Kate doesn’t drop more names in support of her pie charts.

    • Nic919 says:

      Ipsos did the polling which is being passed off as research. Polling can be done fairly quickly and I would not be shocked if this meeting was quickly convened following a certain viral incident with Louis.

      • Blithe says:

        Nic919, thanks for this info! I made my Very biased comment with traditional academic research standards in mind. I appreciate the reminder that there are many other types of research, and that each will have their own standards.

        I do think you’re right. The Cambridges seem to be trying to up their game, perhaps in response to feedback from their recent major outings.

  49. Zoochy says:

    For someone who’s so obsessed with fashion and allegedly studied art history, how does Keenie still manage to mismatch colors in a monochrome look?

  50. Seri says:

    All the love for this lady on this website is astonishing…

  51. Nyro says:

    Suits always look cheap on her. Her taste level is low and so she chooses the suits in the worst colors along with the worst cuts. That easter egg pink is so cheap looking. She could have gotten the same ensemble from Charlotte Russe or Wet Seal and it would look no different than this $2000 McQueen.

  52. BeanieBean says:

    There’s video, Royal Family youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfxkAoXY2is

    • MrsTroyTempest says:

      She is literally reading her “opening remarks”. She can’t speak to the aims of her foundation in a couple of sentences without a script.

  53. jferber says:

    I bet you she didn’t read one book along the book cases behind her, giving her false credibility. “Look at me! I have all these books around me!” Please don’t tell me the shoes are copykeened from Meghan. Lastly, I would bet she hasn’t read one book in the past ten years.

    • MaryContrary says:

      I get so much second hand cringe from all of this. The craziest thing is that if she just followed the original BRF plan she wouldn’t look like such an idiot. She should just be doing the “bread and butter”-open buildings, plant trees, make small talk. She could wear her frilly dresses and look pretty. The catch of course is that she’d have to put in more hours. But she would still have plenty of time for tennis, hanging out at her parents and baking with her kids.

  54. Bethany says:

    I the photo of the big, smug smile she looks like she has screws loose. What is wrong with her and doesn’t anyone see this?

  55. Rizz says:

    I wonder if she got face paralysis or something. One half of her face seems extremely more frozen than the other. In that disastrous jubilee event where Louis went wild, there’s a clip where Kate ‘blows a kiss’ at Louis who’s seated next to her. It was quick and she got really awkward after that but I noticed when she did that literally one half of her face didn’t move while we made the kiss face. Even one eye was closed and the other was open. Not kidding. You can look it up.

  56. K says:

    The DM are really yanking Kate’s chain of late with all these articles calling out how much ger outfit costs during a cost of living crisis…

  57. HeatherC says:

    More busy work from Kate. Why does she even bother? Has no one told this woman that as long as she stays married to TOB and he outlives his tampon father, she will be queen consort? Even if she doesn’t do a lick of “work” from now on there is no mechanism (that I am aware of) that MAKES her work. It’s all tradition to make themselves look good but she’ll eventually figure out (or someone will explain it to her) that she doesn’t have to be Diana or Meghan to get the ‘job.” She literally slept her way into it already.

    • Lady Digby says:

      Exactly why do they want to rebrand her as as EXPERT on anything? Why are they relaunching her as an Expert based upon no academic research or relevant work experience? Kate has always done the minimum work wise but loves dress up and posing. She has DONE her dynastic duty which was her main task. Yes a big promotion is around the corner so is this why she is being recaptioned as EXPERT BARBIE? After Flop Tour did the crisis managers suddenly become aware that this is 2022 and we need to move her image on from decorative to performative? Have they looked at other effective and substantial Royal ladies in other countries and decided to promote Kate into another league as befits the future PoW?

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Kate is an empty box with guaranteed stamped on the outside by orders of the BRF?BM. Thank you Tommy Boy.
        “Because they know all they sold ya was a guaranteed piece of sh*t. That’s all it is, isn’t it?”.
        Kate is very much out of her realm in intellectual/ intelligent discussions. There might be a minority that believe otherwise.

        They are not trying to rebrand her as an expert. They are still trying to sell her as an expert (since 2018). The sell is Hard and funny AF at this point.

  58. Twinkle says:

    Here taste in jewelry is as boring as her taste in clothes.

  59. PrincessPlanky says:

    What really bogs me off is that my post-grad research (you know, proper stuff not KeenLearn) was on the importance of Early Years initiatives – I was especially interested in making physical activity interesting for the kids who don’t get picked. The successful intervention that came as a result got cut because of funding. I also worked worked on a really vital National early years programme SureStart that was amazing… until the government changed and suddenly ‘look no funding’. These were properly researched and made a big difference to communities who find it hard to access services. What difference is this back of a fag packet research and Keen’s lip service meetings going to make?

    That, of course, says nothing about the optics. Keen thinks trouser suit means the business box is tucked but not that the whole outfit costs what some families have to live on for a year.

    By the way, on the subject of trousers. It was always said that the Queen dislikes royal women wearing trousers on duty, yet Keen, Sophie, Anne and Camilla all wear them fairly regularly now. While MM certainly paved the way, I think it was the DoE who stamped his foot and HMQ is really ‘whatevvs’ now.

    • Nic919 says:

      The sad part is that Kate could bring attention to the lack of programs to help young children, but instead she centres it on herself for PR. It’s really sociopathic how little she cares about actual children and the media establishment just helps her with the propaganda.

      But despite all this, kate will never have the legacy that Diana had. Because anyone with eyes can see that she is the empty mannequin that Hillary Mantel identified form day one and that she will never do anything of substance. She’s lived an empty 40 years and it will only continue.

  60. Veronica S. says:

    It’s a waste of tax payer money, yes, yes, but I’m sorry, I can’t get over her shoes. What even are they?? They look velvet or suede, which isn’t seasonally appropriate to start with, and then they’re a different shade and tone of pink! They don’t match!! At all! The suit is neutral-warm, and the shoes are very warm!

    Shoes are SO EASY. SO EASY TO MATCH. These is clearly an outfit for a white shoe. Silver if you wanted more flash. This is just unbelievably basic fashion shit that she can’t put together with thousands at her disposal.

  61. jferber says:

    Princess Planky, I’m sorry your work was sidelined, work you were eminently qualified to do and had done your own valuable research. How galling that this horrible woman is pretending to do work that you actually did and lost funding for–just shameful.

  62. TEALIEF says:

    She is a little past the one year anniversary of the embarrassing incoherence of a joint interview with Dr. Biden, where she disjointedly ummed and mumbled about giving parents tools. Almost a year to the day, her over-stimulated, tired child neener neenered her. But, mostly it’s “I’m a serious person in a pink power pantsuit”, take 2 do-over with the Health Secretary, and other government officials to lend credibility to this photo op after last year’s failure. Expect an annual revisit with charts and graphs.

  63. Cha Cha Slide says:

    I’m still trying to figure out why the Early Years are important. What are parents NOT doing that they should be doing? What are the action items???

  64. Tessa says:

    I would not look to Kate for any answers. The experts in the field are the ones. This is all “make work” for Kate.

    • kelleybelle says:

      Exactly what it is, exactly. Nothing more than make work. Without it she has nothing. Oh, except that her photography “is the secret weapon of the monarchy,” whatever the hell that’s supposed to mean …

  65. Janice Hill says:

    I actually like the outfit. Plus, she looks like a Top CEO.

  66. Jaded says:

    Just watched the video and here are my comments.

    1. Long mass of fake hair is totally unprofessional as is the constant hair flipping.
    2. Bubblegum pink is not a professional colour to wear to a high level business meeting.
    3. She read everything from notes, but literally had nothing of substance to say in a conversational or ad hoc manner.
    4. She clenched her hands and rubbed her thumbs obsessively, showing how out of her depth and nervous she was.
    5. Her faux-posh accent and habit of speaking without moving her mouth/jaw much made her sound unintelligible at times.
    6. She repeated her appreciation over and over, which is just filler for having nothing of substance to say.

    Altogether another fail.

    • caitlin says:

      No doubt every speech she makes is researched, written and edited by others so all she has to do is show up and read. What I’m wondering is how does she manage to make small talk with intelligent professionals who are often experts in their fields? Would love to be a fly on the wall lol

    • Wiglet Watcher, says:

      Thank you for the notes. I stopped watching her because I cannot understand what I’m hearing.

      I need subtitles.

  67. Julia K says:

    I’m looking for an earlier comment that I can’t find now, but my feeling about dressing professionally is the same, color shouldn’t matter. I gave the keynote address at a Neurology/ Stroke symposium years ago. I wore my favorite peach / pale salmon pants suit. It fit me well and was very flattering, as I always received compliments when I wore it. I brought my knowledge and experience with me and felt dressed appropriately and professionally because that is how I behaved. The color of my suit didn’t matter.

    • Wiglet Watcher, says:

      I made a comment about the same. They dress her up In Flashy packaging because the product inside is of low quality.
      When you bring value you can be dressed plainly. It’s about substance. It always will be. That is what is valued in these academic circles.

      • Tessa says:

        It is not just dressing up it is much more Kate has poor work ethic and is all on surface the worst is how she treated Meghan

    • Tessa says:

      Kate has no background she apparently believes she is qualified because she has three children she had plenty of time to get a degree and do real research but did not bother so she could be there when will called

  68. poppy says:

    That is a gorgeous suit. The woman can wear clothes, no doubt.