159 thoughts on “Kate said encouraging words to school children; Eugenie at Balmoral with boyfriend”

1. The decision to invite the Midds to Balmoral was made six months ago? So, March then, right? This seems significant. What was going on back in March, anyone remember?

   1. March was the height of William’s bad press this year with several people calling him out publicly and BBC even asking him about his negative press.

      http://katemiddletonreview.com/2016/03/13/katie-nicholl-doubles-down-on-prince-william-being-the-cause-of-his-own-bad-press/
      http://katemiddletonreview.com/2016/03/16/prince-william-is-still-trying-to-reconcile-his-love-of-hunting-and-his-conservation-work/
      http://katemiddletonreview.com/2016/03/22/ingrid-seward-calls-out-william-and-kate-kp-defends-kates-st-patricks-day-no-show/

      March was also when Kate skipped St. Patrick’s Day, the Cambridges went on that ski vacation (with Carole in tow), and William skipped Easter with his family to go to Jecca’s wedding.

      http://katemiddletonreview.com/2016/03/07/prince-william-and-kate-middleton-took-prince-george-and-princess-charlotte-skiing/
      http://katemiddletonreview.com/2016/03/24/prince-william-jets-off-to-kenya-without-duchess-kate-or-their-kids/

      1. So the “invite” may have been more of a “get your ass up here we’re having a talk”?

         No, too much to hope for.

         1. +1

            Negative influence to the duo from carol the middelton camp.

2. Well, Kate certainly would know all about never giving up on one’s dreams…

   I’ve always like Eugenie and Beatrice. I hope there is another wedding soon. I do love a good royal wedding.

   1. I’m interested in what kind of ring and wedding dress Eugenie will choose. For the most part, I like Eugenie’s style, so I’m curious what kind of dress she’ll go for.

      1. I wonder if Lady Louise will be a bridesmaid, Cressida for Matron of Honour perhaps? I wonder if George Percy will be invited. I hope Andrew and Fergie are on their best behavior. Andrew will be the one handing Eugenie over to Jack. I am thinking Spring next year. I am rubbish at predictions but I am pleased Eugenie has a decent guy and is happy.

         1. Beatrice definitely for Maid of Honor. Possibly Cress as a bridesmaid but maybe not. Louise and/or James might be there in some capacity. Perhaps George?

            1. I agree. Beatrice is closet to Eugenie. I think Louise and James in some capacity. I would hope George but having never seen Eugenie and Beatrice with him in public it is hard to know. I think Harry or hope Harry is involved if Eugenie and him are close.

            2. Oh, Mia….please!

            3. I would have thought Mia was more likely. Zara and Peter must associate with the York girls. Why is it William and Kate are the only ones who don’t want anything to do with them is beyond me.

      2. Late for the party but here are my predictions:

         Possible summer of 2017 wedding. Wearing either her mother’s tiara OR borrowed one from HM’s collection (perhaps one that once belonged to *her* mother, a fitting nod since Eugenie looks so much like her great-grandmother). A dress similar to Autumn’s or Lady Melissa Percy. Something with satin and covering the shoulders.

         Beatrice-Maid of Honor (obvious choice since the sisters are close)

         Bridesmaids? Possibly Zara, Cressy, Lady Melissa Percy and perhaps a cousin from her mother’s side
         (Louise for Junior Bridesmaid since she’ll be 13 years old)

         Also in the wedding party? Hopefully Harry, Peter/Autumn’s & Zara’s girls

         The readings? Perhaps cousin Peter or Uncle Charlie? Or someone from the Ferguson side?

         As for guests, PLEASE let the Percy family be invited and at the ceremony (okay, so maybe it’s just me who wants to see Earl George Percy in a suit again! **blushes** I can’t help it! I think he’s adorable) plus, and I hate to say this, but I think the Midds might get an invite, at the very least.

         I sure hope Sarah will be on her best behavior and I’m sure Andrew will be the proud papa walking his baby girl down the aisle. I can see her with her hair down, sparkling tiara with that lovely smile of hers to match. Small (by royal standards) church wedding but photos sold to Hello! Magazine in the UK and People here in the US! 😀

   2. If Eugenie or Beatrice ever marry, I hope they do it well out of the public eye. Small church in Scotland like Zara or tiny church at Sandringham (private property). Preferably with the date hidden from the public and anyone who reveals the date is cut out of the social group.

      Anything else will be endlessly attacked by all York haters out there. Andrew and Fergie will need to shut up – for once – for their daughters’ sake.

      But p.s., I hope for a Vivienne Westwood wedding dress for Eugenie, like the Thurn und Taxis daughter wore to her London wedding.

      1. Oh, a Vivienne Westwood dress would be fantastic. Do you recall the wedding dress she made years ago for a Scottish woman? It was for a tv programme where bespoke outfits and rings were made. The dress had tartan elements. It was contemporary and medieval but just wonderful.

         1. I never saw that! I like the tartan she did for Helene B-C when she received her Order.

            http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/02/22/article-0-11DB9DE9000005DC-240_468x687.jpg

            1. Oh, that is smart! I can’t find the tartan wedding dress designed by Vivienne Westwood; it was years ago. A couple were getting married in Scotland and VW designed the wedding outfits for bride and groom. Just stunning. I could see Eugenie in something along those lines. This isn’t the dress but it’s stunning:
               https://www.google.com.au/search?q=vivienne+westwood+tartan+wedding+gown&client=firefox-b&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwim_7zftpnPAhUW1GMKHZ_4CHsQ_AUICCgB&biw=1153&bih=587#imgrc=qlsgHJfFCtsWWM%3A

   3. I agree!

      If the Yorks were allowed they would be such sincere dedicated (as PRoyal, and Countess Sophie) representatives of HM and the people.

3. Oh, then the March date is interesting. I have no idea why William is given so much power but assume it’s all about keeping the line going seamlessly, and not replicating the hiccup that saw the Queen’s life, via her father taking the throne, take such a dramatic turn. Deferring to William has been the pattern since he was born, and look what the result has been… a poorly functioning adult who is now a father to two small children.

   With regard to the Middleton’s at Balmoral, Kay also mentions this: “…the domestic life of the Middletons is beyond reproach…” in relation to Spencer/Ferguson family divorces. I thought to myself, “what is it you know Richard Kay?” Michael Middleton was nowhere to be seen at Balmoral.

   I’m not sure William is ‘out of his depth’ at Balmoral, just wants to have his people around him when having to front up to family, to deflect uncomfortable conversations perhaps. If we’re talking about power, it is Carole who has it over William.

   I think I’d rather be invited to Balmoral when Harry was hosting; that would be a fun weekend. I’m glad that Eugenie has found a decent man. Best of luck to them and a happy life together at Ivy Cottage with cousin and friend Harry as a neighbour.

   Like you, KMR, I am confused with the focus of the mental health initiative. The generic advice given out to the kids was encouraging but glib. I get that the kids get to meet celebrities, and being so young, are easily influenced. But we know that there are kids in that school who feel ostracised for any number of reasons and would not be chosen to meet the royals. The number of badges on some of the kids indicated head prefects, achievers in something at the school. I doubt that a highly traumatised child would be in that mix to meet royalty.

   And I agree, KMR, that kids need to develop resilience because they will, inevitably, fail to get what they want at some point, and fall short. It’s how you handle disappointment that is important, open your mind to other possibilities, cope with the twists and turns of life that could lead you somewhere unexpected. Similarly, being ‘super sociable and super enthusiastic’ is not an option for some; it’s glib advice as well.

   1. Yeah, there wasn’t going to be a kid in that class with W&K that got up there and was like, “My father beat me” or “I was molested when I was 8”. That’s too real for royalty.

      1. It sure is. Kids with unstable home lives for whatever reasons don’t expose it willingly for fear that their lives will become even more unstable. And what would Kate say to someone who had been beaten or abused? “Interesting”?

         1. Yep. For certain situations there is much more at stake in the child’s mind and reality if they reveal what is going on than just “stigma”. W&K are just interested in “breaking the stigma”, not dealing with hard stuff. William only wants “easy” stories after all.

            1. Stigma is the tip of the iceberg when you are just trying to survive. Anyone going in to schools or to speak with groups about mental illness needs to be professionally trained, otherwise they could unwittingly do immense damage.

               I would prefer W+K to do the less complex ‘ribbon cutting’ events; after all, they are there for the photo op to prove they are ‘working’ so why pretend otherwise? I despise how these two use vulnerable people for their own ends.

            2. Jen I completely agree with you. However, I think a decision was made to try to make William and Kate look more relevant. Harry has Invictus, Sentebale, Walking With the Wounded and other very credible things. He’s running rings around the two of them.

               William’s ego makes him want to appear important and knowledgeable. But he has no real follow through. Also, I believe both William and Harry have stated that they don’t want to do the ribbon cutting engagements. I’d include Kate but she will simply parrot anything her husband says and considering her motor skills when it comes to clapping I don’t relish the idea of seeing her wielding a giant pair of ceremonial scissors. Also, even with William she has issues understanding they will be pulling a rope or removing something that has been draped for unveiling.

               It’s very hard to come up with a win-win situation for these two that doesn’t involve private, all expense paid holidays.

            3. For me every time they/their PR team talk about not wanting to make their work about ‘cutting ribbons’ I get this serious desire of scream at their faces – but what do you mean??? Do you even bother to look and know what your family has done/is doing???

               I don’t like the way they talk about it seems they are diminishing their family hard work. Yes they do a lot of those, but they also do a lot more that the younger generation!

               When W&K first talked about not wanting to do those type of engagements I was happy and excited for them to do so…I’m still waiting. They are not cutting many ribbons BUT they are not bringing anything new to the table.

               The Countess of Wessex, Prince Edward and Duchess of Cornwall do a lot more interesting things in their engagements: are more interested, talkative and know how to deliver a spech.

               I have this feeling they are making a mockery out of the older generation as if they are better or have done more, which they haven’t. And it pisses me off!

            4. They say they don’t want to do the ribbon cutting stuff, but then aren’t willing to put in the work doing actual work that would make a difference. William has his conservation, cyberbullying, and now mental health stuff but he doesn’t work hard enough at any of it. Certainly not hard enough to make up for his lack of doing the ribbon cutting stuff. Same goes for Kate.

            5. YES, exactly, KMR! Couldn’t agree more!

      2. Too real for Kate and William, not too real for Camilla and her work with abused women.

         1. + 10000000

         2. True. Too real for W&K, they only like “easy” stories.

   2. That’s the first thing I noticed, the number of badges on some of these kids, therefore my thoughts exactly.

   3. The comment about William being out of his depth around HM’s staff and other people at Balmoral was very revealing.

      What better way to get to know some of these power brokers without the press or official apparatus in attendance? If Theresa May is at Balmoral, what better way to get to know her, perhaps get some advise?

      …but to be intimidated by Equerries and LIWs? You really have to be a dolt with no social skills.

      And rather than use tjis golden opportunity to build bridges and a network, he brings his inner circle who tell him how great he is, who do not encourage him to build bridges with the people he will working with, who may be able to help him with his initiatives in the same way that Harry is helped.

      When he visits other heads of state, he is visibly out of his depth because he hasn’t tried to improve himself in this private opportunity presented to him.

      He would be more worldly and knowledgeable if he mingled with these people instead of sticking like glue to his inner circle.

      It’s a completely wasted opportunity and it’s a pity he doesn’t see this.

      I know he is too old to be forced to do this, but my goodness someone has to, otherwise he will continue to embarrass himself.

      I’m genuinely flummoxed that he is out of his depths with LIWs and Equerries. Granted Equerries are picked from the military, and HMs LIWs have been a formidable bunch, but he acts like this is all new to him and or he is so lacking in self confidence that he is intimidated by the help!!

      1. I think he is uncomfortable with equerries and LIW because he knows that they do not respect him. He probably doesn’t care, sees them as glorified servants. He is probably even more uncomfortable with the private secretaries and other PTB, who may be urging the Queen to get him in line.

         1. Given the stories about KM’s treatment of staff behind closed doors, and William’s Twilight vs. James Bond treatment of the staff? His angry insistence that all staff use KM’s full title and curtsy? I’ll bet you’re right. Even the gray men cannot hide the fact that none of the staff respect either of them.

            Once people realize the silliness of fawning over people merely because of accident of birth? Then the person has to start earning the respect that was previously automatically awarded. HM has earned it. Charles has earned it with Prince’s Trust, Duchy, etc. William has earned only disrespect, and everyone working the corridors of royal residences may be giving him the side-eye.

            May be why W&K insist on hiring outsiders for major positions, like JLoP and Jason. Because “doing it their way” means hiring royal-inexperienced staff who will kowtow instead of reminding them of their royal duties and how they’re failing at them.

            1. Hi there! I was unaware how KM treated staff? What happened? I hate to hear of that type of behavior.

            2. There has been ongoing whisperings from staff at CH and recently Anmer that Kate is rude to them.

               I can’t remember which residence, but someone was fired for publicly mentioning Kate’s rudeness.

               It’s also the little things that people keep mentioning, like she never thanks staff etc.

      2. I see Willy’s posse as a buffer against royal duty and the thought of duty or the expectation of duty. Also a buffer against his wife and family duty. Carole is also the Cambridges’ buffer against the world, each other, and growing up.

         Until her maj and Charles grow a spine and consistently take Willy to task, nothing will change.

      3. It’s a shame that Kate doesn’t talk to the Ladies in Waiting and the Equerries as she could learn so much.

         And Equerries are easy to talk to, I think the ability to carry a conversation and to ease the path when someone is nervous is one of the skills required. (I’ve met a few for the British Royals and the Swedish Royals)

   4. When reading this article my first thoughts were they must pick the kids with the least traumatic/less severe issues. These two are so ill equipped to deal with a serious issue.

      1. Well, didn’t William ask for an easy call at that crisis center lest he become emotional? That whole ‘engagement’ enraged me so I won’t say much, just that as someone else said the mental health issue is the ’cause du joir’ and these two haven’t an iota of a clue as to what they’re talking about. I will say that if their presence as prince and princess helped in any way that’s great since anything that helps no matter the source is important.
         Kate’s comment blew me away. Seriously? “It’s all about standing up there and being super-confident, being super sociable…that sounds like she’s a former cheer leader encouraging the ones trying out for the squad.
         Mental health is literally deadly serious business, and it can’t be easily and simply reduced to whether or not one had a happy childhood. It’s complex and thankfully there are people who sacrifice so much to help, and it truly is a sacrifice facing the reality day in and day out. I suffer from extreme depression, anxiety, and ptsd among other things and I must say that I respect the opinions and thoughts of the posters on this forum than I ever would Bill and Cathy’s. However, again, if seeing a real live prince and princess helped these kids in any way that’s great.

4. The way HM and Charles is treating Will looks like the way an addict’s family treats their loved one: enabling. In the public image, it looks like they give unti his whims and Will gets away with his atrocious behaviour.

   As for Kate and “sociable” comment. Girl has zero confidence. Kinda hypocritical to tell others to just be sociable and confident when she has neither of rhese skills. At least when it comes to her duties. Who knows what she’s like behind closed doors. And if she is sociable and confident at home, then she needs to being those qualities to her work. Maybe confident in bagging Will, but sociable? Girl has no friends. So I doubt that.

   1. You are right, Miss K. Hypocritical Kate should think twice before giving someone advice. She herself is not a good exemple of “sociable and confident”.

   2. +1

      1. +2

         1. +3

            1. Ok +4, 😉

            2. Make that + 5, and who else thinks that Kate might have had to look those words up in the dictionary before the engagement? Keen doesn’t exactly fit, but she did manage to work in ‘fantastic’.

   3. The Queen has never done anything about any member of her family’s atrocious behavior. Anne, who I admire now, was sullen and rude when young. Look at Andrew’s whole life. This is her greatest failing, as a monarch, and as a mother.

      1. Anne is still sullen and rude, but she works hard so it is mostly overlooked. HM did finally act and order the divorces of Andrew & Sarah, Charles & Diana. Too late.

         1. I don’t find Anne rude for the most part. Straightforward, blunt, and not a warm and fuzzy person which she acknowledges. She’ll get stuck in there and do everything asked of her and more, though, so I admire her for it and her tireless work with Save the Children. She got nominated for a Nobel for that.

            1. I second that Ellie. I think Anne deep down knows how to have fun but is serious and has kept herself busy with her patronages in particular Save the Children. Not an easy charity by any means. Anne realises that her position can influence even if its a little. I to think Anne can be a little blunt but its just her way. Anne even went to boarding school unlike her mother and Margaret and therefore like Beatrice and Eugenie value their friendships that they make.

   4. I worry about such advice. There is a lot of emphasis on playing the part – sociable and confident – as opposed to being a person of substance, that is possessing real knowledge and integrity. The former always disappoint because there is just nothing much beyond the sociable confidence.

      1. Kate needs to stick to sports. She is emotionally stunted herself and should not be giving children any advice about mental issues because she hasn’t sorted herself out yet.

         1. I’ve come to think that Kate isn’t sporty. She loves tennis, but we’ve never seen her play or enthuse about any other sports. Even Hockey though they keep putting her in hockey photo ops.

            She is a gym rat who likes tennis and skiing. Those are the only sports we see her participate in and is enthusiastic about.

            Zara is sporty. Pippa is sporty. Kate is a gym rat. There is a difference.

            1. +1

            2. +1 a gym rat who is obsessed with her personal appearance

            3. Very much a gym rat obsessed with her looks. I have no idea why the sport label has stuck, apart from her enjoying watching Wimbledon (plus playing but who knows how much or at what skill level) and going sailing. She has shown no interest in sports-related charities.

            4. Additionally, she is patron of Sportsaid since 2013 and has done less than 5events for them in all that time, and that’s me being generous in number of events for Sportsaid – only 3 come to mind immediately.

               Meanwhile she has visited Ben’s charity close to 8 times since becoming patron in October 2014.

            5. Ah, Sportsaid needs to have Ben Ainslie at events; then Kate will turn up. I wonder if anyone on her staff does an audit of these visits, pointing out that it’s not a good look to blatantly favour one charity so obviously.

            6. I don’t disagree about her lack of sportiness but if they are going to keep continuing to pretend to be patrons at least with sports she can’t mess up the kids with bad advice like she is doing with this mental illness issue.

            7. If Kate is a gym rat, then all she does is cardio. I’m a bit of a gym rat. I lift heavy-ish weights and I have muscle definition in my arms. Kate does not. She is just super skinny with little muscle mass. I think her body size is due to a strict diet and lots of cardio, no weight lifting.

            8. I disagree about the gym rat part. If she was a gym rat, you’d be able to tell with her physique. My boyfriend and I are gym rats. Kate is skinny because if her diet. Well I should really say, lack of diet. Girl has no booty. Girl has no muscles. Gym rats have muscles. Kate’s just skin and bones.

            9. Jet Texas, saw your comment after i posted mine. Agreed! Kate’s a cardio bunny. No gains!

            10. She has muscle definition in those thighs of hers, though….other than that, just skin and bones.

            11. I agree Herazeus! Kate took part in sports when at school, like we all do, but she never took any of those sports further, did she? She didn’t join a social hockey team or play tennis for a club. She did do the boat race thing for a while but dropped that so quickly once William was back.
                I think she just uses a rowing machine and maybe a treadmill at home. Her sister Pippa is the gym rat though.

            12. I didn’t do sports in school.

            13. @KateMiddletonReview

                No sports at school? Gosh, you were lucky! It’s compulsory here so you don’t get a choice. You do get to try different sport though which is how I found I was good at cricket! Luckily my school is situated above a good swimming beach so we got to use sea kayaks etc, and got to learn rope skills and abseiling down the cliff face to the beach.
                I had thought everyone had to do sports at school, thanks for showing me I was wrong.

            14. We have mandatory Physical Education classes, but playing on sports teams is not mandatory. The sports teams are extracurricular activities.

            15. I read a long time before it was public knowledge that William used to play tennis at St Andrew’s with his friend Kate Middleton. Its a small world Herazeus isn’t it. 🙂

      2. I wouldn’t worry too much Jen, aside from being a real live prince and princess I don’t think the kids gave much thought to what they said. I am a hermit at heart so I agree that it’s far too simplistic and also doesn’t take into account different personalities. Some perfectly “normal” people are simply quiet ,not to mention that we as human beings are constantly evolving and changing.
         To try to be someone you are not is dangerous, and utterly counter productive and I think that’s what Kate is doing. “Duchess for Dumbies” sort of thing. Playing a part which much be exhausting since it’s not who she really is. As you said, substance is vital.

5. William’s addiction is power. He has much to learn about life. Kate is an empty-headed woman, who ad lib’s everything she says, and is clearly inept when it comes to doing anything by herself. I think she plays games, and likes to come across as being genteel. The woman cannot even press a buton to start a piece of equipment. This is the woman whose response to the horrific conditions some young people in India have to endure by saying “interesting”.

   1. Agreed. William is really messed up mentally, and Kate is, as you say, empty-headed. I wonder what a woman like Michelle Obama thinks when she talks to Kate. Of course, we’ll never know.

6. I am glad that the kids were given the support they need and provided with encouraging words. Kids deserve to be supported. I wish they would have asked what resources were helpful to them and how they found them.

   As far as Carole. I can’t. There is something about this family, especially Carole, that gets under my skin. William is an indulged man and is used to people excusing his bad behavior from the Queen to his wife. I see him as stamping his feet and getting his way. He just angers me.

   Best of luck to Eugenie. She will make a beautiful bride. I do hope that the press is kind to her. I’ve always loved her and her sister and felt that they have always been slighted by the public and press by virtue of their parents.

   Thanks for the roundup, KMR!

   1. Yes, the resources available to the kids would have been useful to know, and I’m sure other kids would have picked up on them. I’m more inclined to temper encouragement with developing resilience which I think is severely lacking. I teach the 20+ age group and in general, the lack of resilience and self-reflection is astonishing. Sweet people, they often fall into a heap if things don’t go their way, requiring an awful lot of time and energy to get them going again. You can learn from disappointments, think your way out of tricky situations and come out on top. It’s not easy, though, and calls for some tough, honest reflection.

      Re. Carole, no. Just no.

7. I think Kate doesn’t realise that you don’t need a manuel to raise children. A friend’s mother said that always referring to a textbook will only worry the parent so just throw the book away. I think being afraid of failure is not a bad thing. It happens to everyone. Being sociable and over confident will only get someone so far and has Kate has zero female friends and is insecure at public engagements I find that a strange thing for Kate to say. Kate has no idea of being on her own and coping. This is why I find Kate a poor role model. I am pleased for Eugenie and Jack. I think Harry being at Balmoral Castle hosting would definitey be fun and relaxing. I look forward to the wedding and the ring and the dress. l hope Eugenie will wear her mum’s tiara. Thank you KMR, for the article.

   1. Your first sentence resonates with why i think Kate supports place2be.

      At her first engagement with them, she was scheduled to attend one lecture that would introduce a day of talks around child development.

      Her appearance was supposed to be the designated 45mins.

      When she arrived at tge engagement, she discovered the next 2 talks were about child development for 0-3yrs old. She stayed for 2hrs to listen to those talks.

      Bearing in mind that the boy was about 4-6mths, i found it compelling that she stayed for the 2 talks that might give her insight into her new baby.

      Her support for place2be is in line with the developmental phases of her children. Each engagement she has with them aligns with something i suspect she needs more information about with regards George and Charlotte’s development, but perhaps can’t ask to be delivered to KP.

      I find it fascinating that she has a helicopter mother who can teach her these things, yet is essentially learning to parent from a manual provided by place2be.

      It’s a glaring thing no one mentions in all of the things she does.

      It also makes me question Carole’s mothering skills if her attached child feels the need to look elsewhere for mothering skills.

      William on the otherhand seems to think attachment parenting that also allows him as much me time as possible is the way to go.

      1. What it shows is that it is all about her. As one of her cousins admitted, KM struggles to find other people interesting. Only when she finds any personal interest in the subject herself can she actually attempt to engage and care At All about what is going on. If it isn’t interesting to her, she won’t or cannot engage period. She has no empathy whatsoever. It has to be about her and her needs.

         William’s version of parenting includes being gone for the first 6 months of their son’s life, as admitted by KM. Dumping their eldest on the new nanny at age 8 months for a 10 week beach vacation. Possibly leaving their 6 week old daughter to head to Mustique (we never did learn when KM earned those new scuba certs, but the timing would fit for that period). Missing their daughter’s first Easter to go to Jecca’s wedding.

         I agree, William isn’t any more of a hands-on or attached parent than she is.

         The news that leaked from the former employers it probably accurate. William as the coddled center of everything, children tended by nannies and out of sight, Carole running around making cheese toast and trying to placate her prickly daughter. Keeps duct taping this relationship back together.

         1. “The news that leaked from the former employers it probably accurate.” – What news? Did I miss something?

      2. Hi Herazeus, I just had a thought, what if Kate isn’t the one who is overly attached to Carole? what if William is the on insisting that Carole be included, that Carole runs Anmer Hall, that Carole helps raise the children? And Kate goes along with it, as Kate always does? It could be that Kate is tired of her mother running her life but instead William is the one who loves having her around? Just a theory 🙂

         1. +1. I was quite close to my mother, but at 34 I certainly wouldn’t have wanted her living semi-permanently in my home. Nor would my mother have wanted to.

         2. That is a possibility, but considering how much time Kate spends with Carole without the presence of William, my guess is that she is firmly attached whatever her personal feelings about it.

            1. Yeah, I forgot about all those private visits to Middleton Manor. I wonder though if she simultaneously chafes at her mother’s interference but yet isn’t able to handle things successfully on her own? That family has the most interesting dynamic, successful parents and three adult children who just can’t fend for themselves.

            2. It has been Carole’s constant interference and presence that has kept this relationship patched together. If KM wants the money, status, and position as much as Whitaker believed? Even if she couldn’t stand her mother, she’d keep Carole there. She knows she cannot keep William without her.

   2. What a contradiction if km cannot functione need a ‘manual’ to speak raise children… Imagine these are the true family unity that is carol the middletons, who tried selling the wonderful simple family life and saviour of, missing from whiny willnot poor, sad life as HRH Wales. Without loving nanny Maria george and charlotte is in trouble.

8. No surprise really as Kate didn’t bother to have a life that included work and adult friends – the Uni education was wasted – at least her family didn’t sacrifice money they couldn’t afford

   1. If i recall correctly, Scottish universities do not pay any fees and if they do, it’s a very small amount.

      What is shameful is her waste of a university place to get her MRS degree where someone else might have truly gained from studying in her place.

      1. Scottish Students and international students do not pay fees and if they do it is a small amount. English Students do. Pippa and Kate would have had to pay. Four years worth. Eugenie went to Newcastle University. I couldn’t believe it. Security must have been a headache compared to a safer campus.

         1. Thanks Laura. I couldn’t remember whether or not English students had to pay in Scotland.

            Do they pay the same exhorbitant fees that are English/Welsh universities ask for?

            1. I don’t know for sure Herazeus. Welsh and Scottish students stayed at home and went to university rather than England because England did not cap their fees. Actually I googled just now and Scottish students were funded by the Scottish government. So yes payment was there. Kate and Pippa would have had to pay because they lived in England. William could have been classed as Scottish. I wish William had gone to Oxford or Cambridge. I think he would have been more anonymous rather than sticking out like a sore thumb on a Scottish coast..

9. I find it curious that the Prime Minister is vacationing and hobnobbing with the Queen and the self important, so called Royals. This is how influence peddling and political pressure is done behind closed doors. That should be more concerning that a leader of a democratic nation is staying the weekend socializing with a heriditory monarch who does questionable things with public money, hides and lies about where she’s using the millions given to her by the public, and has raised arrogant dolts as her kids and grandkids.

   1. I’m sure you know this visit by the PM to Balmoral has been a tradition for decades. I doubt much influence peddling is done. It is a duty visit and some PMs were not fond of the duty, particularly the Blairs and Thatchers.

      1. Do you remember Tony Blair’s excrutiating detail regarding his wife conceiving at Balmoral?

         PMs attending the Queen at Balmoral is normal. Other heads of state meet her there too.

         Despite Balmoral being billed as holiday time for the Queen, she still meets heads of state and members of the govt there.

         1. “Do you remember Tony Blair’s excruciating detail regarding his wife conceiving at Balmoral?”

            Woah. Wait. What? He actually said that out loud?

            1. Those were my thoughts!! Bleh

            2. Yep. His post-prime ministerial biography.

               Something about feeling low.

               Something about his wife not packing ‘contraception equipment for fear of Balmoral staff being judgy when they unpacked her suitcase.

               Something about ‘giving himself’ and ‘devouring her with animal passion’.

               I think entire British nation shuddered.

               Going to google to see if it was serialised so that i can post link.

               ETA: Can’t find the correct link, but this article alludes to the *offending passages from his biography and that night of passion at Balmoral.

               http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/8389091/Cherie-Blair-Tony-still-excites-me-in-all-possible-ways.html

               *offending in the sense that TMI from a Prime Minister. It’s akin to your parents telling you all about their sex life! Lol.

            3. Ugh, TMI and so weird. His wife didn’t pack contraceptives because she was afraid the staff would be judgy, but she’s ok sharing details of her sex life with the public? Okay…

      2. Oh thanks I didn’t know that. Still don’t think that it’s right for these democratically elected leaders to be vacationing and enjoying the hospitality of some person who calls herself the Queen.

         1. The Queen is probably lobbying Teresa May for a return of her yacht, Britannia. So clever these Windsors! Royal Yacht Britannia cost A LOT and was de-commissioned under Labor govt. The Queen cried. IN PUBLIC. And has wanted it back ever since. With the taxpayers paying, natch.

            During the jubilee year they had Andrew Marr, doing a BBC doc, corner Tony Blair and ask if regretted the yacht-snatching. Blair stammered.

            Now Queen has Boris Johnson doing her give-me-back-my-yacht campaigning. Article in the Telegraph suggesting it could be used for Brexit entertaining of World leaders! For the people! Not for Queenie to sail around the Med! Oh no! For Brexit trade-treaty parties…

            The Queen gets what she wants. She’s like William that way 😉

            Watch this soon-to-be-Yacht-filled-space.

            1. There has been a concerted effort to give her a yacht. Cameron was on the case before he was booted out.

            2. How on earth could a yacht be justified from the public purse? Diplomacy on yachts… really!

               The BRF already costs its citizens one third of a billion pounds plus per year to maintain, and the Queen wants a yacht? She has private wealth. Why doesn’t she use her own funds for a vessel if she wants one so badly? In all seriousness, why can’t the Queen fund her own toys? Would the British people accept this?

               Oh, bring on the republic before some weak, weak politician succumbs.

            3. Actually, the yacht can hypothetically save money on all that traveling and where to stay. I read somewhere it was actually cheaper to maintain it, but it was a big Labour thing at the time to get rid of it. Other monarchs have one and use it for official business. IMO HM should get her own damn yacht.

            4. It used to be cheaper when flying was more expensive. But the cost of the upkeep in Britannia got to be more than the cost of flying and staying at hotels, so that’s why they decommissioned the ship.

10. Why do they give William so much power!?!?!

    Because he is as sly, manipulative, and temperamental as Diana. They couldn’t deal with her and they cannot deal with him. HM does not want to believe they failed in such an epic way in raising him, so she pretend it will all magically improve some day.

    Charles wants to be loved by his son and family, and William withholds that affection and time with the grandkids. He prefers time with his “real family” the Middletons, but he’ll take every penny he can squeeze out of his birth family. Imagine how Charles feels knowing William calls Mike Middleton “dad”, and that the whole nation knows William feels that way?

    I wish they would cut William loose. Stop with any protections or influence behind the scenes that are smoothing ruffled feathers in the press or government. Cut off the money, remove him and his line from the succession. They did it with Uncle David, they can do it with him. Let him give all the interviews he wants bemoaning his fate. And once everyone else sees how entitled and selfish these two are, the people will be glad to see the back of them.

    1. Yep, yes, hell yes!!

       Everyone knows the William problem and bury their heads in the sand about it and use the Palace machinery to protect him in the hope that the ship will magically right itself.

       1. I think if I were Charles, I’d cut him off financially right now. Of course when Charles ascends to the thrown, William would get the Duchy, but in the meantime, Cut. Him. Off. That would put an end to Kate’s awful clothing purchases, too. Win/Win!

    2. It would be nice if they could skip him, but it would undermine the whole concept of hereditary monarchy. People would eventually think “why not just elect the best person?” In fact, lots do already. I can’t ever see William signing the instrument of abdication.

       I have always thought the Duke of Windsor wanted out for years, and his marriage provided the excuse.

       1. The Uncle David thing undermined the whole idea of hereditary monarchy, and yet the monarchy in the UK continues. If William doesn’t want the job and is actively endangering the governmental system of monarchy through his behavior as David was? Throw him and his line out.

       2. Every new dynasty has undermined the principle of hereditary monarch.

          To clarify: William the Conqueror wouldn’t accept Harold Goodwinson as King of the Anglo-Saxons even if he was crowned and anointed.

          Stephen ursurped the rightful heir Matilda and she abdicated on condition her son Henry would succeed Stephen rather than Stephen’s son. Sidenote – it annoys me that she has been written out of history yet she ruled for a few months whilst others like David or Edward 5 are included in the lists of English Kings and Queens. Ditto Lady Jane Grey.

          Henry 4 usurped his cousin Richard 2 to put the Lancasterian line on the throne and we all remember how that ended.

          The Tudors’s claim to the throne was both tenous AND illegitimate twice over, and they went to great lengths to conceal that fact.

          The removal of the Stuarts in favour of their Hanoverian cousins is another upset of the hereditary principle given there were 50 other people ahead of the Hanoverians in the line of succession.

          And so to David…..

          The only consistent thing about the hereditary monarch of Britain is that they are all related by blood, but in terms of upholding the line of succession, they treat it as a suggestion rather than cold hard fact.

          1. haha! suggestion! Last year I visited the NPG in London (National Portrait Gallery). Under a portrait of Harry and William (the one where Harry sits, perched on a couch and William leans) the words were something like ‘these are the heirs to the British throne’. I was shocked!

             It mentioned both of them. Made no difference between the two of them. As if they could be…swapped. Or interchangeable.

             Yes, it was painted before P.G. But the wording was still in place after his birth. And could have easily been changed.

             Perhaps, at the NPG, a Republican is on staff?

             1. I love that portrait. So much life in it. Even from William.

       3. I thought the British government pressured David to abdicate, due to his Nazi sympathies. Mrs. Simpson was a good public excuse/cover for the truth. There were people in power at the time who would have pushed to abolish the monarchy rather than allow a German sympathizer to the throne.

          1. Yes, the government pretty much forced him out. Both he and Wallis were Nazi sympathizers.

             1. Nazi sympathisers was the least of things he could be accused of.

                It was also convenient hypocrisy given that entire establishment were also Nazi sympathisers and would rather appease Hitler than stop him.

                Exception Churchill who saw the danger of Hitler from the start and called him out to the disgust of most of the establishment who thought churchill was wrong and ridiculous for his views.

                The big bad was communism and communists. That was the thing the establishment feared the most. As far as attitudes were concerned, better Hitler than communists. Britain even had a popular fascist party led by Oswald Mosley.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Union_of_Fascists

                In the wiki link i’ve added, it mentions Lord Rothmere as an early supporter of the British fascist party……He was the founder of the daily mail and the daily mirror. His family still owns both papers.

                Mosley married Diana Mitford in Joseph Goebbels’s home with with Hitler as guest of honour. Oswald was her second husband having previously been married into the Guinness Family.

                The Mitfords were establishment family who were distantly related to Churchill’s wife Clementine.

                And Hitler received a steady stream of establishment figures visiting him and openly showing their support.

                There is a book, the guilty men, published in 1940, that picks out 15 politicians of tge time including 2 Prime Ministers plus leaders of the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties who were sympathetic to Hitler. The book shows how widespread was the support for Hitler.

                As for attitudes towards the Jews, Germany was not unique though it remains unique in the decision to kill them.

                Negative attitudes towards the Jews in Europe had been formulated over centuries. There is the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290, you have Shakespeare’s play, The Merchant of Venice, in whivh the villain of the play is a Jew and much is made of his Jewishness, and not in a good way even if Shakespeare gives him one of the greatest speeches preaching tolerance towards Jews.

                There is the infamous case of the Dreyfuss affair in France in 1894 where an officer was falsely accused, court marshalled and imprisoned for spying with little evidence other than he was a Jew.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_affair

                The point being that what happened to the Jews didn’t happen in a vaccuum made by the Nazis. It was something hatched from fertile ground prepared over centuries and considered quite normal until the Nazis went too far.

                David and Wallis were never given a chance to defend themselves. Or rather, to whitewash their images like the rest of the establishment. I know there are govt papers that allegedly prove their guilt on this account, BUT the British govt with the help of the FBI also put together an official dossier, since been discredited, of Wallis’s visits to brothels in China were she was supposed to have learnt sexual tricks unknown to Europeans which enabled her to trap David. That dossier was widely circulated at the time.

                Naive? Yes. Stupid? Yes. Misguided? Yes. But they were only folliwing the prevailing mood and attitude of the established tjought at the time.

          2. That and a load of other things–he was too progressive, identifying with the Welsh coal miners; he was an atheist; he was just a liability in so many different ways. The romance with Wallis was pretty much a cover for shoving him off.

          3. I thought he abdicated over the whole Wallis Simpson thing, not his Nazi sympathies. Could the government “can” him for that? Everything I’ve read about the situation suggested that he left because he couldn’t marry the divorcee and also remain King.

             1. David was a class A idjit in how he was led to abdicate with Wallis as the official excuse given.

                It’s since come to light that he was unsuitable in lots of ways, careless with his govt papers, indiscreet too suvh that he would discuss contents with friends or leave them lying about. He also didn’t work well with his ministers.

                There is strong suggestion that he inadvertently passed on messages of govt work and secrets to enemy agents one of whom was said to be Wallis’s other lover.

                Plus most important of all, he really didn’t want to be King. He preferred pleasure over govt which must have bern a pain for govt ministers waiting on him to sign documents that would then be actioned into law or not.

                Wallis was a convenient scapegoat for all concerned. Edward was led to believe this was the problem and he abdicated thinking his life wouldn’t change much except that he wouldn’t be King anymore. He genuinely thought he could continue in some sort of Ambassadorial role, living in England, married to Wallis etc.

                Boy was he in for a rude awakening.

             2. Thanks Herazeus! William certainly does give off “David vibes” doesn’t he! I wonder if Kate or Queen Carole would be as enamored with him if he stepped out of the line of succession.

    3. It is a fervent wish of mine that they stop giving in to William’s (and Kate’s via William) demands. I would just like to see that curtain they’ve thrown up around them snatched away and let them really live like the normal people they claim to be.

    4. Those are my sentiments! The queen and Charles are actually the ones that hold all the power but the don’t seem to get it. Cut the purse strings for a while and I’m sure they’ll come to snuff.
       My British friend and I have an on going argument. She says Charles will be the end of the monarchy and I tell her it’ll be William! Charles actually does his job quite well and seems to enjoy it now. William seems to hate almost every aspect of it. I agree that he should just take himself and his line out of succession.

    5. Hear, hear! As Herazeus pointed out, the monarchy has skipped people in the past, it can skip William and his line. Some government pressure, some financial wrangling, perhaps an inheritable dukedom with full ownership of Anmer Hall and he may abdicate to Harry.

       1. They won’t give him anything that is in the middle of Sandringham, an estate that is privately owned by the monarch. They’d likely need/want to relocate to a location where photography of them can be legally forbidden. Parts of Germany or Switzerland come to mind. But William isn’t going anywhere. He wants the money, status, and control.

          1. Absolutely.

             He won’t step down, he wants it ALL. His wife does, too, but all she wants to do is stand next to him and grin like a maniac and flash the world. These two are so vile….

             1. Ya’ll are crushing my dreams here…. 😉

11. Thanks for such an interesting post KMR!

    It’s stunning that Kate would encourage those young women to be super confident and super sociable. As we have seen time and time again, that she is nether. And what about those young women who are introverted? There is already tons of stress put upon those who find it difficult to be in large groups, who find it difficult to interact with new people but now they are being told to go against their very nature and be someone they are not! As someone who is extremely introverted and for whom childhood and young adulthood was a horror story, this advice would have only furthered my feelings of otherness, of not be good enough, of being too strange. I pray that W&K never interact with some young person holding on by their fingernails, these two would push that poor person right off the cliff. Interesting also that Kate encouraged the young woman to never give up on her dreams, but it’s okay that Kate gave up on all of her dreams and ambitions in order to please both her mother and a man. I have to say that I firmly believe that one day, when her children are grown and gone, Kate will look around at her life and wonder where “she” went, what happened to “her” and what the hell she got herself into.

    Reading Richard Kay’s article I was struck by the bit about William and Harry vacationing at Balmoral on separate weekends. Apparently, the brothers aren’t as close as they once were, sad really for both of them. Also, not at all surprised that William will only go to Balmoral on his own terms, which includes bringing along his mother-in-law. I think that William isn’t so much in love with Kate as he is “in love” with her family. The closeness, the ease of being together, the cheese toast, all that and more is what he is “in love” with, marrying Kate just happened to be the way to keep all that in his life. I say this from some experience, my ex daughter-in-law and I are very close, always have been, and I think her marriage to my son lasted as long as it did because of our closeness. She doesn’t have a relationship with her mother and her grandmother is quite elderly and infirm so I was/am the closest thing she’s had to mother most of her life and as the mother of my grandchildren I hope we will always be able to remain close.

    So excited about a possible royal wedding in the future!!! Eugenie will make a lovely bride!!! I wonder what tiara she might wear, the one the Queen gave her mother? A loaner from HM?

    1. Laurie, I totally agree with your post about Kate’s remarks saying that it’s all about being “super-sociable.” My heart sank when I read that. My older son has always suffered from extreme social anxiety, and if someone, whom he might see as having authority or celebrity or some amount of expertise, had told him that the way to deal with his anxiety about changing schools or even having to sit in the lunchroom or enter the locker room was to just be “super-sociable” that would have sent him into even further despair. It would have taken away any hope of ever overcoming his anxiety. Kate’s not an expert and she’s doing greater harm by making such comments. She should just stick to having Jason Knauf script questions for her to ask the real experts.

       Carole did her daughter an enormous disservice by placing too much emphasis on being social, forcing your way into the right crowd with the royal connections, no matter how badly they treat you or how they tear away at your self-confidence and self-respect. Evidently no thought was given by Carole–or Mike, let’s be honest–to have Kate develop her own interests, her own friendships, or try to succeed on her own and develop some sort of independence. Bedding and bagging the prince was all that mattered. Self-confidence and self-respect did not. And that has left Great Britain with a very lazy, insecure, empty-headed, crotch-clasping, serial flashing senior member of the royal family.

       1. And as a side note, William’s constant referring to Kate as “Catherine” drives me absolutely nuts. If he refers to her father as “Mike” and to his brother as “Harry”, this insistence on “Catherine” is just absurd.

          1. Especially since she herself has told people to call her Kate!

             1. Agreed. It’s like he is trying to elevate her status, and the public just isn’t having it.

          2. I’ve seen interviews where William calls her Kate, so why the sudden change?

    2. Sociable? Kate’s version of sociability was to moon the boys at school to become popular. And she’s still “socialising” in that manner. What a fraudulent mess.

    3. I feel that I owe the Duchess a bit of an apology here, I misread the article. The Duchess in fact spoke about being “super social and super confident” in a group discussion with parents. I just watched the video and it did not show what she said prior to these words, so I don’t know in what context they were being said. I apologize to the Duchess and anyone here who might have been upset by my error.

       1. Yeah, I got the impression that she’s acknowledging the pressures on children today including the need to be “super social and super confident.” If she sees that as the case, then I suspect she can relate.

12. To all those attacking William , regardless of whom you have sided or side with , don’t forget that the queen was also lenient with Charles when he followed his whims and destroyed his marriage , it seems that despite her rigid appearance , she has a soft spot for those she loves .

    Still I think the Middleton’s appearance at Balmoral was a PR act no more no less , I mean who is better than the most popular person “the queen” to boost Kate’s popularity which is going down the hill and taking William “despite all his positive attempts” with her , notice how little crowd they now draw wherever they go , those who were cheering for them at the school were quite numbered , as opposite to the queen wherever she goes .

    1. Charles didn’t publicly destroy his marriage or reputation.

       As far as the public was concerned, Charles and Diana were in a fairytale marriage all the way until 1992 when Diana published that autobiography ghostwritten by Andrew Morton in which she destroyed the public image of her marriage and named Camilla.

       Until then, the public was kept in the dark even where Camilla was in plain sight.

       Most of what has been written about the marriage has been with hindsight following the publication of that book.

       I stumbled on an ill-tempered episode of ‘the Sally Jesse Rapheal’show from early 1992 where Lady Colin Campbell is peddling her biography of Diana and saying the marriage is over and has been since the mid-80s to a chorus of boos and being called a liar by the audience, Sally and a few reporters that included James Whitaker and Andrew Morton himself who was about to publish his ghost written Diana’s story later that same year.

       James Whitaker later admitted that he knew the marriage was over, but he was sticking to the party line.

       If Diana had never published her biography, there is every chance that the public would have continued to believe the fairytale story and the marriage would have continued in public.

       http://princessdianafriend.tumblr.com/post/44447611819/sally-jesse-raphael-1992-royal-dishers-wow

       Charles AND Diana were able to hide their affairs and present a united front that fooled the public for ten years, until Diana told.

       There was no need for HM to help their PR becausr the principals were ok at getting their own and or offsetting their bad headlines with solid, consistent work that allowed them lots of leeway by the public.

       William and Kate are failing publicly on all fronts, HM has to step in.

       1. It seems I didn’t express myself correctly , what I meant was that had the queen interfered by supporting Diana who was lonely and still young in her twenties and didn’t have her parents’ support like Kate , and was more firm with Charles concerning Camilla , maybe things would have turned better , instead of relying on Diana who was having a terrible personal life with nobody to turn to “making few mistakes herself in between” to be silent and save the marriage , and this is what I meant when i said that the queen has the tendency to let those she loves have their own way , like Charles with Camilla and now William with the Middletons if what the writer said is true ; but apparently , to Kate’s advantage , they have learned from their mistake with Diana , who did not have anybody’s support and now they are helping Kate , who despite having a strong mother’s help is still weak and doesn’t want to work .

          1. Charles was helped by the Queen Mother, and the Queen minded the Queen Mother.

             If Diana had understood that and created an ally in the QM, she might have had Charles to herself.

             Yet all that said, Diana tolerated Charles’s other mistress, Kanga, yet minded Camilla.

             How Diana dealt with Kanga shows that she might have been able to deal with Camilla.

             1. Maybe you’re right , but Kanga was different than Camilla , I think Camilla is more shrewd , and I don’t think Diana was a match to Camilla “hope I used the expression correctly” , it was this plus other things like Charles jalousie of Diana’s growing popularity which drove him straight to Camilla who worked relentlessly on being with him , so the queen , although I am her number one fan , still she should have interfered personally and put Charles in his place , like she’s helping Kate now , despite the fact that she is older .

             2. I agree that Kanga was different. Though she and Charles may have been “very good friends”, I thought she was really window-dressing to deflect attention from Camilla. Kanga did have a sad end.

                It’s interesting that the Queen was dominated by her mother and her husband, especially when young. A bit like Kate?

             3. Hi Fifi , yes poor Kanga ; I don’t think Kate is weak nor the queen , Kate has a mind of her own , she is just lazy and doesn’t want to make the effort and used to a mom that pampers her and wants everybody to do the same with her , the queen is tougher , actually from what I see , I like her personality , and this is my analysis as a foreigner , british people here might have another say , but she is traditional with an open mind , regal but dutiful , maybe her weak point are her beloved ones , but she is a human being at the end of the day .

13. By the way , I don’t know if any of you noticed new “private” pictures appear now on Pinterest , of WK saying good bey to PG at KP before heading to the helicopter .

    1. Hi Alia, yes I saw them. Georgie looked a bit upset, poor thing but Nanny was right there to comfort him.

       1. +1

    2. http://fromberkshiretobuckingham.blogspot.com/2016/09/wills-kate-wave-goodbye-to-george-tour.html?m=1

       These, right? I spotted Lupo, I was wondering if they still had him.

       1. Yes Miley , and I think Lupo appeared in one of Kate’s pictures in Vogue , but these pictures are quite cute , whether it was Lupo or PG hugging his father

14. There is some interesting shade being thrown the Middleton’s way within this review of the TVs series ‘Victoria, which is currently being broadcast by the BBC. The whole article is worth a read to appreciate the context…
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/sep/17/queen-victoria-marriage-stirred-brexit-like-racism-says-writer-of-tv-show

    1. Very interesting article Tara2, thanks for sharing.

    2. I’m actually excited for this to air in the states! I think PBS is playing it in January!! To fill the downtown void.
       Are you watching it?

       1. Yes, I am watching. It is a well scripted series with some great acting and locations; archive material with some dramatic licence of course.

15. KMR, I love your point that it’s OK to fail. Nothing could be more true. Failing does not make one a failure. All of our great leaders went through years of failing but willed themselves to figure out how to triumph. It’s painful, but necessary to build resilience. Jo Boaler, a Brit mathematician at Stanford, teaches this philosophy to get kids to persist when learning math.

    I’m betting that W&K’s team reads this blog and that idea of failing being a learning ecperience pwill turn up in one of their visits for mental health, because nothing they’ve said thus far sounds authentic.

    The kids at Stewards Academy who spoke publicly spoke from the heart and were impressive. And this is where I dismiss W&K as anything but airheads. W&K merely showcase how lazy and inept they are with all priviledge while their audience comes across as prepared and poised.

    K is shallow beyond belief, a distinct Middleton trait.

    As for which Balmoral weekend to attend, the Theresa May, Harry and Eugenie gathering sounds way more fun (minus the shooting party — shudder).

    1. I agree that children need to learn how to fail. How to get up and try again and again.
       Coaches give such advice to student athletes. Often, teachers in the arts will do so, too.
       But, the average kid is only shown how important success is. There is little attention paid — well, often, there isn’t, to the actual work that goes into success and failure. We cannot win every time and winning often doesn’t live up to our expectations. “Oh, I thought I would land a Broadway role, not a part in a summer theater production.” “Oh, I won the bronze medal, not the gold. So, I didn’t win after all!”

       We all need to be reminded of how important it is to follow our dreams and work toward them. That is something to be admired. Success is too often measured in ways that few people can really attain. Working hard and trying one’s best is something everyone should be proud of doing.

       1. I hate how society celebrates medicocrity now! How everyone gets a ribbon or trophy. We’re all winners and no losers. I actually think a lot can be learned from not coming in first and failing at something. It can be the motivation someone needs to spur them on and make them a better adult in the real world. Where, you may not be the one to get the promotion etc.
          my niece is at the age were we’re teaching her the art of being a gracious winner and loser.

          1. But the way they elevate Kate is also a celebration of mediocrity. The press claim that she is beautiful and intelligent and eloquent, none of which is observable with an objective eye.
             Take any random 34 year old off the street and she will have worked more than Kate, likely more educated than Kate and not waited around for a man to finally decide to marry her.
             Kate is like a 19th century aristocratic wife with no concept of what a modern monarchy needs to do to survive as an anachronistic concept. As much as she tries to copy Diana, it is the work ethic that endeared Diana to the people and her willingness to take on unpopular causes and be with the people. Kate does the bare minimum and frankly even less than that. Considering Diana was only a few years older when she passed away, if we compare what both have done with their lives, Kate is seriously lazy and barely acts like an adult.

             1. +1
                “But the way they elevate Kate is also a celebration of mediocrity. The press claim that she is beautiful and intelligent and eloquent, none of which is observable with an objective eye.” – Perfectly put!

             2. So true! I understand beauty is subjective but Kate isn’t the great beauty or fashion forward princess the media tries to push. I actually think she looked her best during her college days, happy and healthy.
                In this day in age hard to believe that they try and push someone who has held no real job of her own, makes inconderidate comments, does the bare minimum work wise, now wears high end fashion labels but still manages to look hohum at best, is touted as the paragon of kindness and beauty?!?
                I’m sure any wife of William would be lauded as beautiful and wonderful but time to get real!
                If she (and William) would actually work I could forgive them a lot of things.
                I do wonder if someone has talked to them because they appeared to have stayed longer than 20-30 min at their last couple of engagements

             3. “I’m sure any wife of William would be lauded as beautiful and wonderful but time to get real!”

                Exactly. It has nothing to do with her or her own merit. It has nothing to do with him, but rather him as Diana’s eldest.

16. One of William’s favorite interests is rough shooting where William goes to country estates and basically shoots what he sees where and when. I wonder why shooting is still important to the Royals?

17. I’m hypersensitive right now so the quotes from Kate to the kids annoyed me to no end. Nothing at all against encouraging kids but one of the best motivational factors out there is giving them someone to look up to who may have those same issues.

    Kate gives the smallest amount of “speeches” she possibly can. She is not improving in giving them at all and has seemingly just given up considering William gave the speech at her patronage. So to tell the girl never to give up comes off to me as just so much programmed drivel.

    On the Eugenie front I think it’s great that she and Jack may be asking HM for permission. I think it’s actually good to continue some traditions even if they really aren’t necessary or germane in this day and age. And even though I think it will strictly be a family affair I’m looking forward to their wedding and wish them all the best.

    1. Yeah, those comments were just generic stuff everyone says.

       I hope we at least get photos of everyone arriving for E’s wedding.

18. I really hope you will write about Pippa’s interview, KMR. I would like to discuss it! 🙂

19. I hate the way People magazine refer to Kate as Princess Kate! She’s never going to be Princess Kate no matter how many times they say it. She’s the Duchess of Cambridge!

Comments are closed.