178 thoughts on “British royals attend church at Sandringham + Wessex Christmas card”

1. Something out of dr. Seuss hahaha brilliant!

   1. One Fish
      Two Fish
      Red Hat?
      Blue Fish…

2. So funny KMR about the Seuss hat! It sure was a fashion faux pas. I didn’t care for Zara’s coat either. How many tablecloths did it take to stitch that one up !?!

   1. Haha tablecloths. Zara’s coat did remind me of a picnic table, especially with the red, watermelon hat.

      1. Watermelon hat — hilarious! Zara clearly was in a foodie state of mind.

3. Its about time Sophie dressed Louise in something more grown up. She is always dressing up her like an eight year old. And why does Kate have such bad posture? She never stands up straight.

   1. Kate’s posture is so bad. Pics from the side like these only highlight just how stooped over she is.

   2. I find it sweet and endearing she dresses Louise in more of a traditional way. She has plenty of time to wear heels like her cousins in due time.

      1. Agreed!

      2. +1

         1. +2

4. Everyone, please like the Kate Middleton Review Facebook page! Its a great page.

5. I knew Sophie would let Louise wear boots. I find it endearing she also wants to dress her more proper at times. I’ve said it before, but the girl has years to dress her age. There is only a small window to wear patent flats and tights.

   Not sure why people want her to grow up so fast. I think the cute boots are a step in the right direction.

   1. I agree Ccoop that there is a small window to wear patent flats and tights but I think that window closed about 5 years ago for Louise. I’m certainly not advocating that she “grow up so fast” just not dress as though she’s 4.

   2. I think Louise’s boots are cute and also “working” boots. Her feet may be adult size while her legs haven’t filled out yet, which makes for a difficult fit.

      I don’t get the sense that Louise has all that much interest in fashion. In the downtime pictures we get of her, it is jeans and tshirts OR riding gear.

      1. Totally agreed that her boots look cute! I was thinking that her feet looked a bit larger-and that the rest of her body needs to catch up.

6. I think they all looked great today. This look is way more becoming on Kate. It’s more classy and fits her body better. And I liked this look on Sophie! The funky hat is daring and fun for the holidays. Louise also looked great. About time. The coat and boots look great.

7. Harry judging Kate’s fashion choice. Hahahahahaha. Just Kidding. It’s probably just the weird angle and wrong timing.

   1. Yeah, I thought at first that he was side eyeing her but then I thought it could just be a trick of the camera angle.

      1. More photos between Harry and the Cambs: gingerharryofwales.tumblr.com/post/136133572887

         1. It looks like Harry and Kate are listening to William, and then Harry walks ahead and is looking back at William.

         2. Hmmm those other photos actually make it look more of a neutral interaction now.

8. That coat is hideous. She seriously looks like she has a tablecoth wrapped around her. And that hat! Did it fit through the door? Not to mention the shoes… gosh.
   Like the style Kate went for today, different but she pulls it off as usual!
   Sophie … what is wrong with her? First the rabbit now the madhatter. Is she having Alice in Wondeland complexes?

   1. Hahahaha

   2. Emma I guess I am just really confused by your comments. After reading some of the Christmas comments and now this, it really seems to appear that you think Kate is perfection and does no wrong. Yet you just want to put down every other royal woman that might look better than Kate. I have yet to read one comment from you that is actually nice to another royal woman (other than Wallis who is not royal). The only royal you praise is Kate and you do it in a manner that just feels really harsh to any other woman that is around Kate. It just comes across as putting other’s down in order to lift Kate up and make her seems better.

      1. I agree with you Overit.

      2. Thank you Overit. I agree with you also.

9. Kates hair is such a mess! Wash it or straighten it, girl.

   1. Is it just me, or does Kate’s hair seem longer in the back than it did when she cut it? Did the wiglet make another appearance? You can see the cut part is a little lighter in color and some of it is peeking through in the back. Just wondering…

   2. It looks like she just gave no sh-ts about her hair. Like she barely even brushed it.

      1. It must be her hairdresser’s day off in lieu of having to work Xmas day. She obviously can’t blow dry it herself and it makes her looks somewhat relate-able here I think.

         1. I’m guessing that dear Kate may have had a bit of misty, light rain hit her glorious mane earlier in the day and ruin her blow out. Perhaps as she was frolicking with George in the garden for a few final moments before leaving him to go to church?

   3. Kate’ natural hair, without a blow out, is bushy and big. In the manner of Hermoine in Harry Potter books.

      It’s very rare to catch her without a blow out. Some day the blow out looks more polished than other days. Today was a day where it looked less polished.

      If Kate didn’t bother with her hair at all or did blow dry it at all, you’d have big bushy hair.

      The last time we caught a glimpse of Kate’s un-blowdried hair was during the first tour to Asia. Her blow dry didn’t hold so well in the heat of Asia. Her natural curls came through. It looked pretty good.

10. I wish I could be positive–but Kate looks like a 60 year old mess in a dowdy, ugly suit (if that’s what you call it?). I know we are encouraging her with wearing suits—but chic ones, not one her grandmother would wear (I’m being unfair; the queen has never looked that dowdy). She’s channeling pre-2007 break-up ugly suit mess. She looks like she just got out of bed and doesn’t care to be at the service–but she could be hungover after that smashing party she had at her house replete with kitschy decorations. She might have a wiglet again–but she may be fooling us with her failure to use a comb.

    I think HM is a vision in white–but she rarely fails in my book.

    I like Sophie’s coat–but her hat is problematic.

    I like Beatrice…her blue coat is pretty. Her boots are fabulous. I wish Kate could find some Aquatalia boots like those–very chic. And they are clean; Kate’s boots are always scuffed and dirty. Perhaps, she could serve as an aid to help Kate with her posture problems. But, I know there is no lost love between the York sisters and Kate–due to the demeaning conduct she subjected the poor Yorkie sisters to.

    Well, I like Zara because she pushes the envelope and doesn’t wear boring all the time like Kate. The coat reminds me of a similar houndstooth coat Kate just wore. I like her makeup and her shoes are cool; in fact, I think Kate wore some similar stiletto Aquatalia booties like hers. At least, every hair is in place. We aren’t wondering what creatures are living in her hair like we are with Kate..

    Oh and I think Harry is side eyeing William because he was supposed to bow to a military person standing on the sidelines. But, Will, manners? No way.

    1. To be fair to Zara, I didn’t like Kate’s recent houndstooth coat either.

       1. Totally true! I remember 🙂

          1. I forgot to add. I do like Kate’s hat; but the hair distracts from the look.

11. I would strongly advise Kate to study Queen Leti’s skirt suits. She rocks the skirt suit!

    Wow, and that was a $2,500 Michael Kors suit?!! Waste of money and tragic.

    1. +1!

    2. Totally agree about the waste of money. So much spent on something so dowdy and ugly.

       1. +2!

    3. I liked Kate’s jacket, even if it does seem a little themed? Like, let’s design a jacket that an Englishwoman would wear to the countryside. I’m a bit 50/50 on the skirt, which would have been a nightmare to sew as there are many pieces and some are bias cut and some are cut on the straight. It does make for a good effect.

12. My 71 year old mother would not wear Kate’s outfit. She would give me the side eye. That being said, it.looks like Kate was in the club all night, took a disco nap/shower, and got dressed. I don’t like an almost peplum jacket with that cut of a skirt.

    Bea looked pretty. As did Anne. I’ve always liked that picture of Sophie and Edward. The outlet with the royal cars is so sweet. Those type of people keep monarchies afloat.Leonore is adorable. Those eyes and that pout make me melt.

    I actually like Zara’s jacket. The hat is horrible though. I love black and white houndstooth. Harry. Oh, how I wish it were a side eye. I was looking at pics of him without the beard and I can say that I love the beard. It needs to stay.

    Thanks for another lovely blog, KMR. You always deliver, but you need a break. I mean that in the sweetest way. You’ve been very giving to us and you deserve to enjoy the holidays too.

    1. Rhiannon, so true! Kate did look as if she was up at a club all night. Maybe, it was due to Baby Charlotte, though?

       Oh, well, I agree. I doubt a fashion savvy woman in her 70s would wear the suit that Kate wore. Oh, and that hat! I don’t know, I think everyone has a different fashion sense, but Kate’s makes no sense to me. I am beyond bored with her and with William. Bring on the Harry and Rhiannon wedding. Let the fun and fashion statements begin!

       Happy New Year to all.

       1. Oh, and yes, KMR, you deserve some time off. You work sooooo hard!

          1. +1

13. Beatrice and I must say Zara look great. I like the monochrome coat on Zara. I didn’t realize Mike and Zara were there this year. Leonore looks adorable in Madeline’s dress. I like the fact they reuse the dresses. A lovely tradition. Harry looks smart in that coat with the beard. The beard is growing on me.
    Please do enjoy the rest of the holidays KMR. As other people here have commented your blog is so lovely and I feel you work so hard.

    1. I like Zara’s coat too. The hat is a statement hat and needs the statement coat to go with it.

14. Kate still looks bland! The suit reminds me of that hideous race day get up just before the breakup. Love Sophies coat but not the hat and please Sophie the crotch clutch doesn’t work for you either. Love Beatrice and Anne today.

15. The body language in Sophie and Edward’s Christmas card photo is odd. Edward is standing a good foot away from Sophie on his bottom half and is just touching her shoulder on the top half with his shoulder. Was he afraid to just stand next to Sopie so he kind of leaned in? Also, Edward has his chest puffed out and his hands clasped behind his back while Sophie has her hands clasped at her crotch making herself smaller and not looking like she wants to touch her husband. Ditto him with his hands behind his back. What is that body language all about? It is a very cold photo when you start really looking at it and not just because of the snow.

    1. I agree with you. I see Edward and Sophie more as good friends vs. spouses. I’ve never pegged them as a “romantic type” of couple. There is nothing wrong with that. I think their relationship is solidly based on friendship and support.

       1. Edward and Sophie do seem to have strange body language. I did think Edward and Sophie were closer. Nothing wrong with being friends first. That builds a foundation. Love can follow after that. However I think Sophie does like to control events / people after Louise’s birth so she knows the outcome. I like to be spontaneous sometimes but not in work.

    2. I’m not reading it that way. They are about 6 to 8 inches apart and they are wearing winter jackets which is probably why his chest looks puffed up. Also, I think this was an official engagement for them which could be why it seems a bit more formal.

       1. I agree with you Lisa.

          I think is not a ‘cosy warm’ type of pic because its context. But I would love to see them hugging or demonstrating affection on the pic, that being said I love that pic and I couldn’t believe they choose to be their Christmas card. 🙂

          I think Sophie and Edward don’t have a romantic couple vibe in public but they seem so comfortable and at easy with each other when doing events together, as best friend usually are, plus they demonstrate PDA, as in holding hands and kissing, when in private. A few years ago a papz photographed them kissing (and Edward through a fits, because of the privacy breach thingy they all love). Not to mention their title was brought again because of their favourite theater play, so to me, they seem more romantic than many royal couples.

          1. Just curious. Don’t you think it’s fair of them to want some privacy? I’ve noticed these type of comments overtime and I guess I just wanted to know. IMO they’re public figures, all of them, so I guess it’s fine to want some normalcy in a more private context. I think anyone would throw a fit if pictures like those were splattered all over the tabloids, captions and everything… It’s okay for a while then it’s fairly ordinary if it starts to bother you…

             1. No, they put themselves out in the public sphere. Most of the events are in public–as in they are outside when photos are taken of them not inside where they have a greater expectation of privacy (so it’s fair game for photographers). In the UK as well as the U.S., public figures have a much reduced expectation of privacy–so that’s the problem with being a royal or celebrity; your rights are diminished exponentially when compared to a private citizen. This is the law of the land; this is why so many are peeved by Prince William because he pushes the envelope.

                And to some extent, they know that their privacy has been substantially reduced; they get major PR perks as related to the media. They also get negative press–but that’s the way it goes when you are a public figure.

             2. I think they have the right to their privacy.

                I just don’t like two thing: the first is when they (as in royals) act they are being followed everywhere and can’t do anything, which is not true, the majority of pics we have are from people who saw them,not because they are being followed by papz.

                The second is when they act like they can do anything without facing the consequences, as if it’s only okay to be portrayed in a certain light by the press.

                So to answer your question I think they have the right to privacy and when the papz cross the line there is laws to protect them I don’t like how they make seem as if they can not live their lives in peace, hence the sarcasm in my post about Edward.

             3. How do you know that Snowsie? I am an attorney so I know a lot of this as I have studied privacy law…

             4. Snowsie: thanks now I understand better.

             5. Hi Runner

                Because without laws they could not do anything about William and Kate nude scandal pics. (this has the particular event I was thinking when I answered) These laws vary from country to country, and as you said by being public figures they have less rights, for example, there have been books published without public figures consent and they can not do anything to stop them, however such behavior is unthinkable in many Asian and African countries.

                When they don’t have the law on their side they have public opinion, several pics from George and Kate taken by people visiting the same place have disappeared from the publishing website, even though there are no laws that forbid the taking of those pics or their release to the public.

                Royals in particular are not 100% defenseless against papz, they hold a lot of power, the fact, that at least, Kate’s events have been covered by a few (or one) trusted photographer is no coincidence, plus photographers were ‘friendly threatened’ that if they were to cover friends weddings (attended by W, K) they would not be welcomed at public events.

             6. Snowsie:

                I am very confused by your answer because most of the examples you provide are how the BRF go above the law due to their power, not because what they are doing is legal.

                As for the nude photos, they were in a public place so those photos were fair game–but they threatened every newspaper in the UK that if they published them, they would slander their reputation et al; hence, using their power to go above the law.

                Also, public opinion is not the law which is what we are discussing–the right to privacy which is embodied within the law–privacy law to be exact. So, that doesn’t apply either. As for photos disappearing from websites, this is the BRF once again using their power illegally to make things go away. There is nothing legal about it–but they get away with it anyway. I am guessing bribery plays a role and that isn’t playing by the rules (law.)

                You are right that the BRF plays by their own rules, such as “threatening photographers” and using their own photogs. However, “threatening photographers” is against the law.

                So, no, much of what the BRF is doing is against the law; they are not following the proper rules and procedures enumerated in statutory and case law due to the power they have by threatening others, bribing others, and other unsavory behavior they engage in. In sum, they break the law left and right to make the public like them so the monarchy continues. So much is hidden and if it came out, the monarchy would be unpopular and would cease to exist. It’s ugly if you ask me.

                There is a lot of corruption everywhere where powerful people break the law using such tactics to threaten people’s careers, bribery to get what they want, threatening lives etc.. It’s despicable. It’s really nothing new under the sun; the world has operated this way from the beginning.

                Put it simply, they don’t have the right to privacy in many ways, but they break the law to uphold a certain image of themselves. You have used examples that support this very concept.

             7. Hi again Runner

                Sometimes I have a hard time expressing myself, so lets see if this time I can do it. 🙂

                When I answered Emma19 about laws to protect their privacy – I was thinking, in particular, about the france nude scandal, if France did not have laws against what the papz did then W&K could never proceeded with the lawsuit they initiated and won.

                In my response to you I wanted to clarify my thought and answer to Emma19, because when I referred to laws, not only was I thinking about France but the ways royals have protected themselves – trying to conclude how there are not as defenseless or hurt by papz the way other public figures are.

                So I forgot to add the second part of my response and instead I made my answer to you a mess.

                I do not have enough knowledge to discuss laws with you nor was I trying to, my intentions were always to clarify my thoughts, sorry about the misunderstandings….

             8. No they no have absolutely no right to expect privacy. We are paying them to entertain us. If they don’t like it they can go back to being private citizens. If they insist on being ‘royal’ which is just a made up concept so they can live off the best of what the country has to offer then we want something back for our money. Telling us they deserve it because of God given rule or superior genetics doesn’t wash in the modern age. Lots of public services are being cut in UK whilst the money to the Queen which she uses to support them all, is increasing every few years. Photos and footage of them at least gives us entertainment and keeps the republican movement quiet. They know this so they play ball most of the time but they are always pushing it; trying to have it both ways as we see with Wills.

             9. No problem at all, Snowsie 🙂 I get where you are coming from. I am not sure that their winning the lawsuit in France was justified either. I mean public figures have some expectation of privacy–but not in a public place, and she was in a public place. I believe that was also unlawfully decided–but I would have to dig further. Thanks for this interesting discussion. I appreciate your points, and I am sorry if I ever came on to strong.

             10. Runner, I didn’t think you came out too strong at all. I liked this discussion a lot! 🙂 Mainly because english is not my first language so I like to take these type of opportunities to practice my argumentative skills (which I cleary need… ahah).
                 I agreed with everything you said about the privacy debate. I think they deserve privacy but many times their demands for privacy are unbased.

             11. I think the royals (and celebrities) should have as much right to privacy as anyone else. That is, when in public they have *no* expectation of privacy and anyone can take their photo. When in private, they have an expectation of privacy and if someone were to creep on them they can press charges. Also, if someone were stalking them they can press charges.

             12. You did a great job arguing your points, Snowsie! And, not even in your native tongue. Awesome 🙂

                 I agree with you KMR–and that’s in general how privacy laws work. There are no differences between royals and celebrities. However, the royals have used extra-legal tactics to erase photos from the public eye when they were taken in public. Often, when a celebrity walks around at Whole Foods, for example, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in that public place so a pap can take their photo as they are in public. The same goes for royals–but royals raise a stink over it even though they are in the public domain. Sometimes, those domains can get blurry –and that is why certain cases are not so cut and dry.

                 However, the royals are known to employ tactics where their right to privacy is greater than everyone else’s, including a celebrity or a private citizen. That is wrong.

          2. They were pretty affectionate at Sophie’s bday, where Edward went with her on an engagement, and she was surprised with a birthday cake.

             1. They seem sweet to me. The BRF tends to be a lot colder in general. I think the Wessexes are probably the most loved-up couple of the BRF. And, my, they were sweet at their wedding! There was so much joy at their wedding that I had not seen at really any BRF royal wedding besides perhaps Zara and Mike.

    3. I agree India, it was a very “here’s a photo of me and my roommate” look, which is odd because of all the BRF Sophie and Edward are the ones that hold hands the most. I get that this photo was taken while on a “tour” but come on a little side hug never harmed anyone.

    4. According to the Royal Forums (whose sources are articles quoting friends of the couple), Edward and Sophie are more like good friends or (ew) brother and sister than husband and wife. It’s the natural result of years of living together. Also I wonder if some damage was done with the Countess’s indiscreet comments to the “fake sheik” all those years ago; apparently there was newspaper speculation that the Queen’s courtiers were so outraged they were discussing removing the Wessexes from the Family. And then the difficulties getting pregnant, the ectopic pregnancy scare in 2001 and Lady Louise’s very difficult birth (Sophie nearly died) could have had considerable strain on them. Pity. I rather like them.

    5. I think it is a cute photo taken on an official engagement. You don’t plaster yourself against your spouse at work, so the photo is appropriate to me. They’ve lasted 20+ years, so whatever they’re doing it is working for them.

       1. No they only got married in 1999; not even 20 yrs yet.

          1. Well they did meet in 1993, so their total relationship is 22 years old.

             1. Does it count as ‘together’ until you’re married?

             2. Thank you Seth, that is what I meant. Their relationship is two decades and counting.

             3. R, I don’t understand what you mean. Could you please be more specific? Maybe the word choice is just confusing me. Sorry! 🙂

             4. If you’re not married then it’s not real; you haven’t committed so it’s not a relationship. All the years of dating before getting married don’t count as ‘being together’. Since they did get married in 1999 and that’s not even 20 years ago yet I was pointing out that saying ‘they’ve been together 20 years +’ was not correct.

             5. Ok, I understand what you mean. I don’t really think being “together” has to be marriage, instead of counting the total period of the relationship but if that’s how you feel, that’s fine.

             6. R, in your opinion it isn’t “real”. Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell have been together for 30 years, but since they aren’t married it doesn’t count to you? What about all the couples who have been together for decades exclusively but because of laws they couldn’t marry? Do their relationships not count at “real”?

                Sophie and Edward dated exclusively for years (no straying like William), lived together for several before marrying probably on advice from HM who wanted them to make sure it would “stick”. In my opinion, they have been in a relationship for over two decades and it is all “real”.

             7. Different people have different ideas of relationships. Some people believe a commitment means a ring has to be put on it (otherwise you end up with a repetitive Beyoncé song). 🙂 Other people don’t want marriage for tax reasons, personal beliefs, etc. (Helena Bonham Carter and Tim Curry come to mind, as they lived in literally adjourning, separate houses together for 13 years but were never married). Different strokes for different folks! 🙂

16. I don’t know why my words didn’t print here, so I reposted.

17. I like the overall look of RP Anne, this is a classic look, timeless, put together with quality, well tailored pieces collected throughout the years. Love it. I also like the jacket Kate is wearing, its cut is well structured and the colors are lovely, but paired with the skirt in the same game of colors it becomes boring. The cut of this skirt calls for more prominent hips to hug and than hang around the knees in folds. If she combined this jacket with dress or skirt in navy or burgundy with a cheerful holiday scarf and Beatrice boots maybe she will achieve classic stile tide to the present. Seem to me this is what she is going for , to look like she is not trying to hard, like she belongs there. Zara’s coat is well chosen to distract from her post baby body, some woman take longer to get back to shape and it is usually more healthy way. I my opinion this is one of the best looks of her I have seen. Regarding Harry, and this is only my observation from church walk on Christmas Day and from the pictures above, Kate is giving him a cold shoulder.

    1. I don’t read Harry and Kate that way. I think she was saying something that he overheard and he knew it was BS. That was a BS look if I’ve ever seen one.

       1. You’re onto something Sunny because I did notice a large scowl on Kate’s face when he gave her that look.

          1. No he is not in Kate’s sight line; he is looking back as if he is annoyed with something William has said. And judging by her frosty body language William probably said something sarky. He is known to be dismissive of people coming out to see them; even referring to them as sycophants in an interview. I don’t think Harry thinks that way though so that might be why he’s looking perturbed.

             1. I disagree R, Harry is looking almost right at Kate. Giving her the side eye doesn’t have to include directly looking at her first.

             2. Yes, I looked at the photos. I think you are right, Sunny. Though totally not clear, it seems that way to me, after I looked at the tumblr shots provided by Snowsie.

18. Little Leonore is adorable. Love the big bow in her hair and the way one of her little feet is twisted inward. So darling.

    Kate’s posture is beyond terrible in these photos. As Jenny posted on another section, it looks like Harry is disgusted and reminding her, “Shoulders back.”

    The Dr. Seuss hat is really too funny for words! You need confidence to pull something like that off!

    as for Sophie and Edward not being all touchy and feeling, I have never seen them as being like that, myself. It often makes me sad to see couples who have been together for a long time seeming so emotionally and physically distant from each other. I don’t see that with the. Well, physically, yes. But, they seem to have an understanding of one another and a dedication to their children and to the Royal Family that defies the odds.

    1. Leonore is one of my favorite royals. She’s so adorable.

       1. Oh, yes. She and hear cousin, Estelle.

          I think the Monaco twins are adorable, too.

          And, of course, PG!!!!!! Little Mia seems to be quite a little imp, too.
          Oh, those tears! Nothing is cuter than a toddler! Or, more exhausting.

19. The only thing I’m finding truly tragic is the length of Kate’s skirt.

    1. +1 Though I am generally not fond of the entire outfit, the skirt especially is problematic!

20. So is Harry throwing Kate shade or what? She’s got an odd look on her face too.

    Sophie’s hat is hysterical! I have one like that with two upside-down black boots on top — like Santa is stuck in the chimney!

    I don’t recall last year — were the Middleton’s photographed at all during this same period? Didn’t they get to attend one of the church services?

    Kate’s suit is d-u-double L.

    1. Jane,

       The look Harry is giving Kate seems to be more side-eye/glare IMO. Kate’s expression seems to be saying “humph….” if you get my drift.

       I love the color of Sophie’s hat but shinkies! It’s just so stinking HIGH!!

       Yes, the Middletons were there last year for a Christmas church service and photographed. Here’s a link:

       http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2886775/Queen-wraps-early-Christmas-service.html

       1. Thank you, Kimothy!!! Appreciate all your answers!

          1. Jane,

             You’re very welcome! 😀

21. You know what’s sad about how much Kate spent on two days of church services—-approx $5,500 ( I am rounding up). And then we have all these flood victims–it’s like she doesn’t think or care about these things.

    Everyone re-wore something because they are more mindful. It makes me sad she could care less how her actions of being perceived.

    1. So true. She’s been re-wearing lots of pieces from a few years ago; why stop here? And how nice would it have been to quietly donate the money. The media would have picked it up and given them some positive PR.

       1. +1

       2. It would have been a donation from the Duchy, which is where all her spending money comes from, not their personal money.

          Should Andrew as Duke of York do something or at least visit?

          1. Thanks for the info, notasugarhere, as I assumed it didn’t come from their personal money, but I didn’t know from where exactly. I appreciate your informative comment.

             Yes, Andy should be visiting as Duke of York, and/or do something…Agreed, there. But, will he, that is the question? How much does Andy really work compared to the other royals?

             1. Last year, 367 engagements plus his trade stuff which may be counted separately. Charles and Anne did mid-500s, Edward mid-400s, Sophie mid-300s.

                Given the scandals, I’m not sure he’d be welcome, but Duke of YORK should be tagged for doing something re. the floods in York.

             2. The territorial designation that goes with the Dukedoms (or Earldoms) are tradition. They don’t actually reflect any tangible connection to such a place. William has had no direct connection to Cambridge. Heck, Wessex hasn’t existed as a kingdom or anything else since the 11th century, yet Edward the earl of it. A more suitable choice for William would have been Duke of St. Andrews, Earl of Anglesey, Baron Kensington if we’re going by places they’ve been personally connected to. Andrew has no reason to attend the floodings in York simply b/c he is the Duke of York. He owns no property there, he has no interests there as far as I know. The royals are still encamped at Sandringham and aren’t going to come up simply b/c a little water has spilled over the banks of a river.
                And there are still cleanup and recovery efforts there. The royals wait to visit in person until every effort has been made to ensure that their presence will not take away from rescue and recovery efforts.
                Likely the Prince of Wales or the Princess Royal will be dispatched after an appropriate period of recovery, to show the Queen’s sympathy. The Duke of York is highly unlikely to be asked. He has nothing to do with York whatsoever.

             3. Charles recently visited areas that flooded a week or so before Christmas in Cumbria. I expect he’ll go as soon as recovery is underway. He always does and chats with the townspeople, thanks the rescuers, and donates money (he donated, what, $60k too). I expect he’s the only one to do that sort of thing, excepting Anne. Two of them are the only ones who seem to have a social conscience, albeit showing it in very different ways!

             4. Thanks for the info notasugar, Ellie and Seth. I cannot believe how few engagements William and Kate do as compared to the older royals. A shame, really. It’s good to know Charles already visited and donated money to the efforts. It would be nice if Wills and Kate showed up (yo, Jason, send them there but minus a super expensive dress worn my Kate please) Can anyone imagine Will doing 500 engagements and Kate 300 plus? I can’t by a long shot—and we aren’t talking about lightweight black tie affairs or sporting events…I don’t see the monarchy surviving with these two.

             5. Well the Prince of Wales is the most senior royal after his parents and his sister is the daughter of the Queen. I don’t see the Queen at 89 or the Duke of Edinburgh at 94 traipsing through wet, cold, flood-ravaged communities. I hope he and Camilla get up there soon.

             6. Andy probably doesn’t even know where York is.

22. First to the good things, I want to congratulate Sophie on being the queen of ‘recycling’ outfits, after all, believe it or not, Kate is one of the BRF woman who ‘recycles’ her outfits the least. HM is repeating her outfit as well, and to her team I take my invisible hat off because she always looks polished and unbelievable stylish.
    Sophie wore that hat and coat at least three more times, if memory serves me right is the first time she combines them both. I love her boots and Bea’s. I personally love Bea’s style and love both yesterday and christmas morning outfits.

    On to the bad, Sophie’s wearing one of her worst hats ever, but due to the amount of times she has used it I don’t think she agrees with me 😉 haha

    Onto the good again I love how Maddie shares photos of her kids. I just wish we could take a better look of the King and Queen with the grandkids, it looks a really sweet photo.

    I personally don’t understand why would someone find Louise family/formal attire wrong, she’s only 12 she’s dressing her age plus it’s looks put together and feminine. You can also conclude it’s something she wears to formal events or when she needs to be more dress up because in her down time or when she’s with her parents she’s very ‘england country side’*, she dressed like her father, jeans, t-shirt, boots.

    *where is a specific way of referring to that style but can’t remember…

    1. Sophie’s hat looks like it got run over, she brushed it off and clunked it onto her head. That weird angle, yikes. It’s like she’s seen us all praising her for good fashion choices and wants to go back to Queen of BRF (bad recycled fashion). Can you imagine her giving a speech in that hat? Her audience is going to tune her out because who’s going to take someone seriously who puts that thing on? Sophie, get it together!

       1. And to our media pals who peruse this site–I’m licensing my little phrase *Queen of BRF (bad royal fashion)* so if you use it, you owe myself, KMR and Runner free trips to England. Be warned!

          1. Haha! Awesome 🙂

       2. I really think that the hat looks like something out of Alice in Wonderland, the madhatter would want that.

          1. “the madhatter would want that” – this made me laugh so hard ahah 🙂

             Not only do I think he would want it I think he would design something for her because she has no problems leaving the house like that 😉

             1. Absolutely!!! 🙂

    2. I totally agree with you Snowsie on all points! I wish Kate would re-wear her clothes given what is going on right now in the UK with the floods..I think what is great about HM is that she has her private tailor who makes clothing for her; because there is no designer label, it’s much cheaper, I assume. I don’t think HM is all that extravagant. If you see in her downtime wear, she seems like one of the most low key royals…

23. Thing that stood out for me at this outing is what the hell is Andy doing there?! Why isn’t he in jail with the other rapists?!!

    1. Exactly!

24. I wonder if Edward and Sophie chose the photo to highlight the travel they do on HM’s behalf, or if the trip was really a fun highlight for them this year. Maybe, I don’t have great intuition when it comes to reading body language, but I don’t see anything amiss about they way the couple is standing or how they relate to each other.

    Lady Louise looked cute in the same black coat and beret she wore for the Christmas Day walk to church. Sophie’s hat may not be as bad as the one Beatrice wore for the W&K 2011 wedding, but it is getting close.

    Speaking of Princess Beatrice, she looked really cute. One of the best. She beat out Kate, since Kate looks like a Ralph Lauren magazine advertisement for 1982. Did she raid Princess Diana’s closet and pull out an old ‘Sloane Ranger’ outfit? At least the hat is better! I think Kate (and really, really Carole) are far too old to be wearing the saucer style hats. The last time I saw a photo of Carole, wearing one of the silly saucer hats belonging to her daughter, I was embarrassed for her.

    Why do I think Harry cannot stand Kate?

    1. G, your rationale for the choice of card chosen by E an S sounds very feasible. Each part of the family seems to independently define what they deem special, which is as it should be.

       I like Louise’s outfit. Like another poster I suspect this is her ‘good coat’ and it accentuates her frame very well. The boots are a good, solid choice in winter weather. The beret will keep her head warm and also suits her.

       I wonder if Harry is not impressed by his brother and sister-in-law these days. We’ll never know… I suspect Kate adopts William’s attitudes as her own. Most likely this is the demeanor she adopted to secure the relationship in the first place, willing to trade everything for a title et al. William has been a very poor teacher to her.

       1. Jen, I think you are right about the whole W&K and Harry situation. I hope Harry finds a fantastic lady in 2016. It will be fun to see how things change.

          1. If Harry and Rhiannon’s paths do not cross, I sincerely hope that he finds a no-nonsense strong woman, one with a killer work ethic, empathy, kindness, and good humour. And who loves Harry and will take him on DESPITE the title.

             Given the circles royalty restricts itself to, I can’t say the odds are in Harry’s favour. The women he seems to be attracted to – Chelsy and Cressida – don’t seem to be made of the right stuff. I could be misjudging these women; my apologies to those who have greater insights into their characters than I do. I’m not convinced that either brother has been exposed enough to self-reliant young women to recognise that an equal partner creates twice the strength in a relationship. Titles and privilege are a hindrance in many ways, it would seem.

             1. I would love for Harry to find a good, strong-willed wife to take on that challenge. But his dating history does not reflect that. He’ll probably end up settling for a blonde Kate 2.0.

             2. Sadly, KMR, I think you’re right on the money. Too many Kate 2.0’s around to make Harry giddy with choice but lose the balance of good sense.

             3. I think it’s also great to think of such a woman’s perspective. I don’t think many intelligent, independent , hard working career women are attracted to the position Harry has or even Harry as a person.

             4. I agree. Harry needs to be with me, but I’m realistic. Aristos tend to marry within their own group of people. That is a small pool. I think that any woman who marries him will have it hard. Any woman who is not part of that “set” will be in a difficult position. Even more so from the public. She will need to be strong in character to withstand that. Until then, Operation Harry is still on, but it will be hard.

             5. Rhiannon, you need to become friends with his besties and infiltrate that way. This will take money. We may have to have fund-raising sausage sizzles and cake stalls to help out with that.

                Yes, whoever Harry ends up with will have it hard: no opinions, isolated from real life, as well being required to be a breeder. That would be hard to accept.

             6. We all seem to want the best for Harry, but worry about another Kate. My hope is Harry has matured by leaps and bounds and will not settle the way his little brother did. The ‘little’ is my poor sense of humor.

             7. The two big relationships of his were blonds, but both worked in their chosen fields. That is one thing they have different from KM.

             8. I think, sadly, anyone he does marry will be eclipsed by Kate, treated like garbage by the media, and also by Kate herself. Can you imagine if Harry did marry a girl who wanted to jump right in and go and do? They would never be allowed to eclipse W&K. It’s a pathetic situation, really.

                I don’t think he’ll marry anyone, honestly. It makes me sad for him.

    2. I thought Beatrice looked really good here.

       1. Totally agree that Beatrice was the best dressed from the rich color and cut of the coat to the gorgeous pair of boots!

    3. I read somewhere that Kate was too chummy with Harry. He was just trying to be nice to her when William was ignoring her or being rude at engagements. She became flirty and then it got very awkward. I also read that she invades his private life and wants to be his BFF; that’s not very appropriate. We all know Kate gets along better with men–so she overstepped bounds; he felt uncomfortable and now we are seeing the fall out.

       1. I can’t pinpoint articles anymore but there was a time when it was implied in some articles that Kate is protective of Harry and she gets involved sometimes. This was published when he was dating Cressida so I always wondered if that was just a way to mark her territory.

       2. He made it clear, just after the engagement was announced, that he barely knew her. I think any articles about how close they are, or her trying to influence him, would be taken best with a pound of salt.

    4. G., I get the same vibe about Harry. Like, maybe in the beginning he liked her, or at least he wanted to TRY to like her.. Lately it feels like he either quietly avoids her or tries to hide his dislike. I can’t really give specific examples, but I have noticed this since approximately Invictus. It makes me really sad because somehow I feel like Harry would love a warm brotherly/sisterly relationship.

    5. As Ellie said, whomever Harry marries will be treated like crap by Kate and by the media-regardless of whether or not the rest of the Windsors adore her! She could have Anne’s work ethic, be sporty like Zara, have a quiet but strong presence like Sophie, good friends with cousins-in-law, Autumn, Peter, Mike, B & E, be affectionate with Charles, have their kids spend time with cousins Savannah, Isla George, Mia and Charlotte and STILL be looked at/made as the “bad in-law” by William, Kate and the press/media.

       Whomever Harry marries has to made of super strong stuff. Rhiannon, I hope you’re ready. 😉

25. I am not surprised to hear that William and Kate do not attend church, other than the obligatory Christmas service, and my, doesn’t Kate look bored at the second one! Harry is definitely giving her a ‘what the f**k’ look to something inappropriate that popped out of her mouth that she could care less about. However, should a monarchy continue, William will be head of the Church of England. So how does that work if he has no faith or can’t be bothered? I’m not critical of his lack of faith if that is his personal choice; rather, there is an obvious conflict here.

    1. I don’t really want to talk about religion because I think that’s something best left off this blog but I do think there is a conflict of interest there if the future Head of the Church of England rarely attends church and or doesn’t have a lot of faith. I think maybe the whole “monarch as head of the church” thing should be rethought.

       1. +1

       2. I take your point about not bringing religion into the blog! Picking up on your comment in the article, I had much the same thoughts as you have just expressed, that is, whether a monarch heading any church is an outdated concept these days. As well, it would be an uncomfortable mantle to wear if you do not have a strong faith yourself. Plus William is batshit crazy about doing anything he doesn’t like so I wouldn’t want to be in the shoes of the Archbishop of Canterbury!

          1. This is irrelevant because William will never be King! The republican movement will have taken over by the time it’s his turn.

             1. You may well be right, R. I do not live in Britain so have no understanding of where a potential republic stands in the minds of the population. In Australia, the ‘attractiveness’ of William and Kate (at least during their latest tour) was said to have put the republican movement back. A former prime minister, Bob Hawke suggested yesterday that the best way for a referendum to succeed in throwing out the monarchy was to ensure it only took effect after the reign of Queen Elizabeth, saying, “The old darl’s looking bloody fit still”.

             2. I agree. And William and Kate are largely responsible. They have become strongly disliked since just after George was about 6 months old. Kate has only ever been popular with young, easily influenced young girls and middle aged women in the Midwest United States. She did okay in her first year, minus the flashing, and then has been so incompetent and unsuitable that even her sugariest fans are having a difficult time defending her. Why they care about a woman who is as cold as a a snake and an utter failure as a working Royal is mystifying to me. There has been a strong shift where they are so hated that newspapers are finally starting to reflect people’s real attitudes and the majority of comments and blogs are extremely negative towards her. She has asked for it and had plenty of time to realize what she was getting into. A lot of the sugar sites have gone silent or posted tragic, sycophantic articles about what a style icon/great mother she is. We don’t know what kind of parent she is other than ensuring that her children are sheltered and spoiled beyond belief. They have a live in nanny and a housekeeper and gardener. I don’t think Kate lifts a finger or raises her children herself. We DO know that she is not a fashion icon and those articles make me throw up in my throat a little. All in all, the Windsors are in massive decline and unless Harry marries someone as charming and engaging as his mother, the whole thing is falling apart. Honestly, I think Prince Charles might try to hang on once the Queen passes, but the people are never going to be okay with Camilla and Kate is rapidly becoming the most despised Royal in generations. She smugly told a small child that they might be “lucky” enough to meet King George someday (gag) and that shows how totally delusional she is. That they are raising their children in a way that will make the transition to public life very traumatic and rough. They are extremely spoiled, but ordinary children and the world has not had an opportunity to bond with them. I think Kate’s idea of the future is delusional, presumptuous and arrogant. People are already fed up and they just keep making it worse. It sucks that a great historical institution will be brought down by a self-pitying, arrogant prince and his shallow, spoiled wife. There is no way that they will be allowed to continue to be the richest welfare recipients ever on the taxpayer’s dime, yet not do their part of the bargain. I feel sorry for George and Charlotte because I am sure that Kate is going to drum it into them that they are special snowflakes that everyone will worship for no reason and then they are going to have go be the generation that watches their lifestyle disappear, never to return. There are going to be some issues there and I think Kate will wind up feeling bitter and angry that her “fairytale” didn’t work out.

             3. Bets, I totally agree with everything in your eloquent response. The mood on the comments section of the DM, for example, is predominantly derisive. Who could believe that dull, cold Kate is a style icon or anything else? There is just.no.evidence.

                My take is that Diana’s untimely death saw an already difficult and damaged William leer out of control. Out of guilt, fear and not knowing what to do, like so many families, William was appeased by whatever means necessary. So he made/makes poor calls on too many things, important things, and ends up with exactly what he does not need.

                But as you said, they have asked for it. I think people were genuinely hopeful for William when he married, and cut him and Kate a lot of slack in the beginning, but the pair have milked their position, family and people as suckers for too long, giving b***er all in return. It is no wonder K and W are smug and delusional since they are cocooned from real life; no consequences. George and Charlotte will have everything… and nothing.

             4. Bravo, Bets and Jen! I totally agree. I couldn’t have put it better myself by a long shot! I have read some of the comments myself, and it is not looking pretty!

             5. And what will happen then? How would you get rid of the monarchy that has entrenched itself in government for 1000 years? I’ve always wondered that.

                I do not think the tone of this blog reflects the majority. W&K are pushed and very well liked. Look at polls. People don’t see the reality–they think it’s great he has a ‘real job,’ and believe the rubbish about her being a down to earth stay at home mom. He’s the most popular! It’s sad but seems the state of general opinion.

                I think Charles will be a great king but I do not see him being king long–or perhaps, ever. For some reason I have this feeling Charles will die before QE, but I hope not.

          2. +1

             1. Bets & Jen, well put. I agree 1,000%. +1+1+1!

             2. Oh dear, whilst I don’t disagree this is such a sad state of affairs. Whilst the BRF has survived poor monarchs in the past in todays age of constant media attention that is less likely to happen. Let’s hope that Will and Kate are made aware of the criticism of their behaviour and look to trying to improve in 2016. I wonder if KMR could be their advisor for a few months to give them some positive, helpful support? I know there may be a feeling that it is too late, but if they really made an improvement in their work ethic I think they could still manage. Charles went through a period after Diana’s death of almost constant criticism but he seems to have come through it in a reasonably positive way.

             3. True, Birdy, it is tougher in an era where everyone has a camera, people can self-publish, digitally or in print, where comments are sought constantly from the public. There is nowhere to hide, especially if you are perceived as not doing a great job.

                I think everyone on this blog would be thrilled to see W and K turn over a new leaf in 2016 (or is that leaves, maybe a tree, hey, a forest), but it doesn’t look hopeful if the past is any indication of the future.

                W and K would be lucky indeed to have KMR as an advisor. To be so isolated and out of step with the real world breeds insecurity and ‘advisors’ tend to wrap K and W in even more cotton wool by spinning anything and everything, regardless of whether it is real or not. Horrible space to be in, royal or advisor. I suspect the die is cast with W and K, sadly. Just too arrogant and entitled.

                Charles did/does have a number of interests that he built up over many, many years and these (eg organic farming) have become mainstream where once they were derided. He thinks deeply, regardless of whether you like/agree with him or not, and gets things done. As our discussions have played out, above, the ghost of Diana still haunts the Windsors in oh so many ways.

          3. Being heir and knowing you’ll have the “Head of the Church” title at some point must be troubling if you aren’t very religious. That could cause an existential crisis in a person if they were destined to be Head of the Church and happened to be atheist.

             1. For a deeply introspective person, such as Charles for example, it would be tortuous. ‘Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown’ rings true. I imagine that William would struggle with this too.

             2. Yes, I agree with both of you. Neither are very religious so it would be very difficult for either of them to pull off the “Head of the Church” thing off. Charles so badly want to be king–so I am wondering if he will try to re-arrange that part of his reign. You can’t fake it till you make that one…

             3. Runner, Charles is a very spiritual man and deeply religous. There are many sources online proving that he is interested in spirituality and the likes. It’s William who is not religious.

             4. A lot of young people in the Western world are not terribly religious. The monarch’s role as Supreme Governor of the Church, Defender of the Faith, is likely to come to an end when Charles becomes King (he wants to be “Defender of Faith”).
                The monarch’s role in the church is entirely pro forma nowadays anyway. When there is an ecclesiastical vacancy, the Vacancy-in-See Committee is established, who create a Statement of Needs. The Statement is then sent to the Crown Nominations Commission. The Commission forwards two names to the Prime Minister, who usually (except in Margaret Thatcher’s case–of course) chooses the first named recommendation. If the person recommended accepts, the Prime Minister formally advises the Queen, who formally recommends the Prime Minister’s choice and sends it to the diocese’s College of Canons, who ‘elect’ the choice. The Church of England’s own figures in 2011 show 1.7 million people (out of a baptized population of 25 million, or 6.8%) attend a service once a month or more frequently, only 30% of the “faithful” attend Sunday worship once a year and only 40% (less than a majority) attend a funeral in a church yearly. So I definitely think it is time, regardless of the personal faith of the monarch of the day, for the monarch’s pro forma role in the church to be ended and allow the Archbishop of Canterbury to be in de jure control as he is de facto already.
                Also please forgive me for the use of the quotation marks. I mean no disrespect to people of faith (I actually am partial to the Anglican faith as it is) but it seems to me the majority of Britons who have been baptized and are technically in the church, actually aren’t very faithful whatsoever, since such a paltry number seem to actually attend. 🙂

             5. Charles vows to keep “Defender of the Faith” title

                http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/02/charles-vows-to-keep-defender-of-the-faith-title-as-king

             6. For some reason, I thought he was spiritual, but embraced many religions, not necessarily just Christianity (including Buddhism). But, thanks for the article, notasugar and the commentary.

26. I am surprised, but I actually think Beatrice was the best dressed today. Her coat was a good length and a beautiful color. She had on a very simple hat that didn’t draw a lot of attention. And then her boots were fabulous!!! I want them :). I think she won the style award today of all the women.

    I didn’t mind Kate’s outfit. Nothing special, but nice enough. I actually like the equestrian look. And the length helps make her legs look longer. Although, I agree with others that she looks like she just rolled out of bed.

    And Lauri I could hear you screaming yesterday for her to stand up straight! Ahh, the hunched shoulders. LOL

    1. Is there an ID anywhere on Beatrice’s boots? I love them! I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I feel she won best dressed this day!

       1. They are great boots!

    2. I love Beatrice’s boots too, hopefully they will be available for winter 2016?

       1. Put my name on the waiting list too please! Fab boots.

       2. Yes, me to, thank you!

    3. LOL, if you heard a soft thumping sound that was me banging my head against the wall LOL

27. Why doesn’t Kate ever stand up straight?

28. I may be in the minority here, but I thought most of them looked terrible and kind of haggard. Maybe it was the weather or lighting, but they all looked very somber (minus a few Fakey Katey grins at the peasants). I think Harry was definitely giving Will and Kate side eye. He seems angry/annoyed with them lately. Will looks like a gloomy, self-absorbed gopher and didn’t show proper respect or make any sort of effort with those sad people that willingly degrade themselves by showing up and being herded into a pen to watch the Smugs walk by. Kate looked frumpy, old and either smug or miserable, depending on the photo. This was just not a good day for anyone except Harry, who although looking upset, managed to show respect, be warm and engaging to people and behave like a prince should. I think Harry is the only Royal, other than the Queen and Prince Philip, that understands that he is a public servant and that all the perks and wealth are in exchange for service to the people. I find it interesting that around Harry, in the past couple of years, Kate either looks smug and bitchy or ignores him completely. I’m sure she’s turned out to be as big of a disappointment as a sister-in-law as she is as a “Royal.” I would die to be a fly on the wall at family functions to watch how they all interact behind the scenes. I’ve.also noticed that Kate turns to social interactions with Prince Charles or Prince Philip when she fee?L’s especially insecure. Despite all their flaws, both are gentlemen, who are likely to be kind to Kate out of basic decency. She steers clear of the actual Royal women, which fits her reputation as a man’s girl, who doesn’t tolerate competition. There’s no in between with her facial expressions and she veers from overly toothy fake smiles and frequent smirking, to suicidally depressed, pissed off and miserable. She can’t maintain the fake smiles and manic expressions, so her reverting instantly to sullen, smug, and scowly, just makes it more obvious that she’s not genuine and seriously struggles with empathy for other people. If you watch people long enough, their mask slips and the real them is revealed. I would like to say that on a day that looked a bit windy, we did not see more of Kate than we usually do. Points for appropriate attire and no flashing, but many points lost with that hideous coat/suit thing. I am convinced that she thinks dressing like a WWII WAF is super classy, when she actually just looks ridiculous. The cut is extremely unflattering to her figure and makes it look like they stretched out her torso like gumby and then wrapped her in tweed. I love tweed in general, by the way, but on her, this look is just so frumpy and dowdy. Her (greasy?) hair and panda eyes looked awful too. Yikes, this was one of the most disconnected and unhappy looking gathering of the Saxe-Coburgs I’ve seen in a while.

    1. +1. The Smugs: perfect description.

       1. +1 Brilliant observations!

    2. Bets–you are on fire today! Thanks for the wonderfully insightful comments 🙂

       1. +1! Yes, on fire today Bets. Stingingly accurate.

    3. ‘Fakey Katey’ LOL

    4. There’s definitely something off between Harry and the Cambridges, and it seems like it’s been that way for a while. It’s difficult to quantify, though, and I find myself reaching for highly unreliable expressions like “bad energy.” But that’s how it looks, and given how Harry interacts positively with just about everyone else I’m inclined to think the problem doesn’t lie with him.

29. I am not sure where to post this but if a role model is needed for making connections with people, this programme and its protagonist may serve as an example.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2015/for-the-love-of-the-game

    Broadcasting as I type, and despite my misgivings about modern football (soccer), and some of the behind the scenes banter shown here, there is much to learn about the social capital of position and the value of renown. Harry shows it for sure. The programme may be on iPlayer later.

30. Hi Tara2 with all the talk of trolls today your post confused me a little. Am I right in thinking that you are suggesting that David Beckham, ex captain of the England football team, has used his influential position to do good ? If I’ve got the right end of the stick I totally agree and this is where Kate needs to look to for some inspiration. If you are in a position to make a difference you should! Not working to make that difference means you are letting down the thousands of fans/supporters etc who have put you where you are. If I’ve got your jist wrong I do apologise. I wonder if many American posters on here know more about Victoria than they do about David?

    1. Birdy, yes that was the point that I was trying to make. I was prompted in this by some of the comments and discussions about Kate’s inability to engage meaningfully with individuals/groups that she encounters and some of the obvious faux pas. So yes, using position to do and promote good; show an interest, empathy and respect for everyone regardless of status. Research and commit to memory information about visits/patronages.

       1. Hi Tara and Birdy
          The difference is that David Beckham and others like him make a conscious choice to do good. They don’t have to, but want to. Therein lies the fundamental difference: Kate though her marriage has to involve herself with charities and so on. It’s not her choice, either before of after marriage. That’s the pity of it.

31. Jen you are so right! Halia

Comments are closed.