111 thoughts on “Princess Sofia and Prince Carl Philip give speech at Foundation’s internet bullying symposium”

1. Yay!! Wonderful Surprise!! I’m happy to see that they are both talking in depth about it, instead of a few tag lines. The more I think about it, the more I love Sofia’s confidence! I truly believe that it is her past that enables her to be so confident. How many of us would pose half naked? That takes some chutzpah!

   1. I must say I don’t think posing half naked gives credit to anyone in my eyes, and the way Sofia commented on her past in that Solliden interview some years ago really confused me. I think she should have known the topic will pop up sooner or later and think of something better to say than “at least I have lived”, which made me feel she was being arrogant towards others as there are many ways to live one’s life. And her CV on the court homepage was very modest when I last had a look (which was quite a some time ago), so she obviously hasn’t done that much e.g. jobwise that was considered worth mentioning. And I’m not saying this to shame her or Project Playground. But I believe that because of her own choices Sofia really knows that once you’re online, it’s all there and it’s difficult to free yourself from your past, so she can be a good ambassador for this cause. I also hope this cause raises awareness of the risks of sharing everything of your life online. Bullying is always wrong, but at the same time we must think about our own privacy and what we can share.

      1. While I wish Sofia had framed her answer differently in that interview I have to admire her for having no regrets. I wish I could let go of all my regrets and guilt since most of it stems from my own insecurities and isn’t actually founded in fact.

         1. Regrets keep us stuck in the past. We all make mistakes; the trick is to learn from them. What can we do to atone for mistakes? Living with good intent to oneself and towards others seems a positive way forward.

            I’m a little conflicted with Sofia. Frankly, disparaging a disabled teacher is not just an act of personal immaturity and poor parenting; such a comment reveals lack of empathy and intelligence in refusing to see the complete person, their intellect and what they offer the world.

         2. When I see a Sofia post, I am more intrigued by her transformation from former life to princess/royal/patron. She always appears loaded with self confidence and pleased to be among people much more accomplished (she doesn’t even have a high school degree) than herself. Is it that she’s been told her entire life that she’s deserving of a fairy tale ending? Wish I knew.

         3. I don’t think we really know her well enough to know whether she has regrets or not. But it’s impossible to get through your life without making poor choices, and we can only hope we learn from them. Sofia is no exception. I know many Swedes still don’t know what to think about this couple, and I kinda understand it. However I think Sofia seems to try very hard to figure out what her role is and what she can give back, and I like that. It’s something many other royals could think about, too.

            1. Her role, and that of her husband, is to disappear into private life and get off the taxpayer payroll. That is what spares and spouses have done before, and what Maddie and Chris are doing now.

   2. Totally agree!

      They seem very serious, dedicated, regal diginified representing the cause/issue and their Foundation. No PR stunt shows that is entitled insincere willnot and cannot middleton.

      Well done Princess Sofia, who is sincere with duties work, attend speaking engagements (by herself or as Prince Couple), reprepresenting the SRF. As to her past work, she made changes as soon as gf of… and has conducted herself dignified, sincere as a couple in love, respecting the people, her position, status and duties.

2. It is a sad reflection on Kate that she’s lowered the bar so much in terms of expectations that other women in the public eye are now checked for Kate’s shortcomings.

   And speaking of that lowered bar, i’m genuinely shocked that CP and S followed up so quickly since their initial launch on this subject. Their original words and thoughts are still with me. So on that note, they are winning even if video ends up showing her treating her hair in the same way as Kate.

3. I remember how in the late enclave24 site, Kate used to be criticized in a normal level. People still tought that her flashing in Canada was a one time only incident and she would learn.

   Like Kate’s engagement interview, after nine years one would have thought that she would have figured out what to say and how to the public. Sadly already then she showed her true self.

   After five years it almost feels like she has regressed. It’s so sad that she gets a pass every time.

   I am not a fan of Sofia, but I’ll have to admit that due to her past she has understood that is expected of her. Why hasn’t Kate?

   1. I don’t think Kate is confident enough in herself or her ability to keep William. Working would have given her the opportunity to make mistakes and learn to get over them. It would have given her an opportunity to learn how to talk to different kinds of people and to keep working towards achieving something even when things are tough. She hasn’t had all that so I don’t think she developed from the unsure girl she was at school.
      Her lack of confidence regarding William’s approval also seems to make her unable to carve out her own identity and role.

      I like Sofia a lot. She made mistakes but she owns them and consistently shows she has moved past them and is developing into a worthy royal.

      I love the direction they are taking on this. They may not have much of a concrete action plan but that’s good. The best place to start is to know your stakeholders and what they need then help them. I’ve seen many a grand project fail because they addressed the wrong things.

   2. I wonder if anyone has ever brought Kate up to understand that something could be expected from her. She seems to have lived her entire adult life protected by others and never taking full control of her life, so I can think having an important role to play is not something she can truly understand.

      1. In hindsight, looking back at her Jigsaw role and the few comments made by her co-workers, Kate was protected all the time as in she was never challenged to do better or to work properly in a team. She rarely engaged with her co-workers and seemed yo be present in body, but not in spirit since she often took calls from William at work and would leave at a moment’s notice to cater to him.

         As one co-worker said,’she wasn’t exactly committed to the job.’

         This amply demonstrates that even where she had given her time to do a job, she never brought her best to the job and was easily derailed by William’s needs. Something that is reflected in her approach to royal work.

         We shall never know why for sure she is so dedicated to William’s needs above anyone else, but it is a sad reflection that she is willing to sacrifice herself in all other areas to do so.

         And she’s developed a thick skin to tune out all efforts to improve other areas and or not see that improvements can be made unless it is in service of William.

         1. I don’t think it is in service to William the man. It is in service to The Prince and all she gets by being with him.

4. Kudos to Carl Phillip and Sofia for bringing young people into this conversation about bullying! Personally, I don’t have much of an online presence, no twitter account and only use Facebook to see photos of my granddaughters but hearing about the bullying of children online is so disturbing and I’m glad to see these royals trying to make a difference in that arena. I have to admit that I’m one who has thought before if someone is harassing you online, then simply quit going online but now I can understand that this generation does live a good portion of their social lives on the internet and simply staying offline doesn’t stop the bullying. So thanks, CP and Sofia for bringing this awareness to a tech novice!

5. Kudos to them to take the next step! I really liked this speech and I think it’s nice that they started with some positive words about the internet and weren’t like /oh everything is bad/. Also for them to say that the problem doesn’t disappear if we delete our social media accounts. It is indeed more complicated than that… it will be a long way and maybe not easy to measure their contribution to the topic but glad they try to change something – looking forward to their next steps!

   And again have to say that I really like how Sofia takes her roles serious. It wasn’t long ago that she married and had a baby but yet she was willing to go out there and work. We’ve seen her doing engagements alone, picking charities and causes to support.
   Ofc one can also argue that royals don’t have a 40h a week job and that it is the least they could do but I still would say it’s a huge difference to some other royals we know.

   1. I, too, like that they said the problem doesn’t disappear if we delete our social media accounts, because deleting our accounts only solves the symptom not the problem. The problem is not the Internet or social media, the problem is people and how we treat each other.

      1. Wow; but how can you seriously write this- “the problem is people and how we treat each other.”

         You run a hate blog where you and the commentators you allow to post spend your time face-shaming and body-shaming a fellow human being, a fellow woman.

         You (meaning you and the posters here) question her skills as a parent, you allow petty and nasty nicknames, you say vile things about her mother, you criticise her for things which royals in other countries also do, etc etc. None of which is criticism; it’s abuse.

         You have talked about your own struggles with mental problems. I imagine you must have had experiences with bullying and nastiness. When you go to bed at night
         and you think about what you do to make the world a kinder, better place, does it really make you proud to think that you run a forum whose sole purpose is to tear down a woman you’ll never meet, who has done you no harm? I hope not.

         1. I think Sofia and Carl are off to a good start. It would be great if Sofia ever brings up her past as an example of the power of the internet, but not sure they will go that far. Like everyone else here, I agree that they are doing their job and seem to be genuine about their intentions to make a difference. Their sincerity comes across. It is nice that we can focus on their actions more than on their clothing choices.

            1. Irene-I have to disagree with you. We all want William and Kate to succeed, but we are all very frustrated with their actions, no one here is being abusive! I think we all feel that they are in a unique position to give so much back, yet, they do not seem to be really interested in doing just that. I think we all struggle to understand this about them.

            2. “We all want William and Kate to succeed, but we are all very frustrated with their actions, no one here is being abusive!”

               Complain about her work ethic or the financing of the family or make a republican argument (against ALL the constitutional monarchies). that’s fine, but please explain to me how the examples I cited above are not abusive.

         2. Do you think I haven’t thought of all of that? There is a reason I’ve mellowed in my posts and have tried to play Devil’s Advocate more and have called out other royals for things we call out Kate for. Because there are comments that are not constructive, are hypocritical, and make me uncomfortable. I dislike the nicknames people have for W&K, I dislike people talking about Kate’s body or face or William’s bald spot, and I especially dislike people talking about George and Charlotte’s looks. Those things make me uncomfortable. Why do you think I’m bringing up this anti-bullying campaign as much as I have and say that people are the problem? I’ve tried to say things here and there about it. Maybe I should be more forceful. But I can’t always read all the comments in time enough to have my replies mean anything. But thank you for your comment, I’ll think about things.

            1. I support your stance entirely…….you have made your personal distaste regarding the nicknames and body shaming very clear. And you have intervened over comments about the children on numerous occasions. You achieve a very healthy balance. Constructive criticsm and debate is healthy here but it is neither sycophantic nor vitriolic. I think you’ve done exceptionally well in setting and maintaning that tone. Xx

            2. I have been studying a handful of katehate blogs for discussion with my group and I believe that you have tried from time to time to moderate the bile, which is why I bothered to comment (no point in attempting to put another point of view on sites like royalgossip or royaldish or celebitchy, which are an ascending order of vileness and made me feel like having a boiling hot shower after I’d read them) but your site is only a lesser degree of things you would never dream of going up to a stranger in the street and saying.

               Do you remember the photographer who innocently came on here to comment about the pictures she’d taken of William, Kate , George and Charlotte at the equestrian event? Because she said that they seemed to her like any other happy family, involved with the children and with each other, you allowed your commenters to basically call her a liar and dismiss what she said.
               It is hypocritical to admonish posters to be polite to one another (“but do not be rude, attack, demean, belittle, or threaten others”- no personal attacks, no abuse! – when your blog is set up for exactly the opposite – very personal attacks on a harmless woman, and, as creator of the forum, I’m afraid you ARE ultimately responsible for what appears on it. and, alas, it is vitriolic, MrsBBV. Please don’t deceive yourself about that.

         3. I have met Kate and she is rude and arrogant, as was her husband. So does that make my opinion more valid than others? I will tell you that I commented on a huffpost article about her pink dress and putty wedges and all the “sugars” attacked me. I have picture with my youngest, who is autistic and we were backpacking through Greece and Turkey. The picture is the two of us at sunset over the caldera and it was about 3 months long. They attacked me for split ends, my casual wear, that I was jealous, unintelligent, etc, etc. Now I’m not a public person and they have no idea the work I’ve done or what my family has been through. Yet they know how little Kate has done and thought her wedges were awesome.

            That is cyber bullying at its core. I bought in to the Disney princess fantasy and yet they attacked me because they thought I was jealous that a prince wouldn’t come anywhere close to me and yet I married a Green Beret who died in the line of duty. You tell me what is cyber bullying. Going after someone who simply expressed an opinion on an article or the “mean” girls who called me a “mean” girl for critiquing an outfit?

            This is not a bullying blog. This is a place where people can come to and look critically at what Kate is doing. Unfortunately Kate does so little that KMR has been wonderful in entertaining us in different ways such as the Swedish Royals who many have come to love.

            I would respectfully suggest that you read what we are all writing and go back to past articles to see what are experiences are with the Royals. KMR has a wealth of knowledge that she is wonderful in sharing with us. Herzeus has tons of history and experience living by the Duchy of Cornwall. And there are many, many, many wonderful men and women who enjoy the blog and have had high hopes for Kate, but have been disappointed so many, many, many times.

            I don’t believe that this is a forum to tear down anyone. From what I’ve read it’s a forum to discuss what they are doing and wearing. Again, I would suggest that you go back and read all the articles.

            Disclaimer: I came across all the filth late last night when it started popping up on my feed so I’m a bit sensitive this morning. 🙁

            1. SpringsMom – I am sorry you had such a bad experience with the so-called sugars but don’t you see that they were doing to you what most of the commenters on this blog are doing to Kate? Instead of debating what you were saying they turned to personal abuse.

               I have, admittedly, only read a random sample of topics on here but the consistency of the nastiness was what struck me. What pleasure can it give people to write such things?

            2. Then read them all, instead of cherry picking because I have met the Cambridges and paid $1500 to do so. We weren’t even talked to or even really looked at other than a tursory hello. How are you, as they turn away.

               I do not see the men and women on here doing exactly the same thing, however, and I remind you again she is a public person. She deserves to be critiqued for her lack of work otherwise she wouldn’t do any. She needs to be criticized for continually flashing. I mean seriously this is a public person. Would you go see a movie and not say “i really didn’t care for ‘her’ performance’ because of x, y, z” because it might hurt the actors feelings?

               They’re public people paid by the public and the public has the right to hold them accountable.

               BTW – I was actually one of the one’s who questioned the photographer because she admitted she didn’t know them, but thought they looked loving and so they must be nice. Well Ted Bundy looked and acted nice. Now before anyone comes after me I’m not comparing the Cambridges to Ted Bundy, but let’s use some common sense and logic puhlease….

               And again, KMR I think you’re doing a fantastic job and I’m a psychologist by training. I haven’t found anything upsetting or disturbing on this site so keep up the amazing work!! 🙂

            3. Irene, to be honest I don’t think it’s appropriate to come on here and tell people here that their behavior does not meet your standards. I think that some of what you say has merit; however, I also think that you’re the pot calling the kettle a rainbow. Assuming you post on Kate fan blogs or at least read — if you have a group for whom you are doing research I’ll be amazed if you don’t — then you know that some of those fan blogs have posters who will defend Kate to the bitter end no matter what, yet do not hesitate to totally slam other members of the royal family, and personally insult posters with whom they disagree as well as questioning their motives for posting. If you feel so strongly about criticism of Kate are you as vehement on the fan blogs when they start in on someone else? If you don’t, then I really don’t think you have much of a leg to stand on.

            4. This is not a hate blog. It is a discussion forum. Please stop with the concern trolling, that you think all the people on here who are logical critics must have something wrong with them if they write criticism that you perceive as hate.

               People on blogs are making valid criticism of taxpayer-funded government employees who aren’t doing their jobs. W&K are public servants who refuse to serve. It is not hate to criticize them for that.

               They are not attacking W&K on their personal social media accounts. They are not cyberbullying W&K. They are not abusing W&K. Please figure out the difference.

               When her fans insist she is a natural beauty, are the rest of us not allowed to counter that with discussions of tanning, smoking, excessive dieting, photoshop, hair extensions, and makeup choices? So one side of the argument can say whatever they want (no matter if it is all sugar-coated lies), but it is abusive to talk about the other side?

               The most violent, abusive, obsessive, consistent cyberbullying I have ever seen is pro-Kate individuals who attack critics. They attack people like SpringsMom who was only expressing her opinion and sharing her personal experiences.

               Or they go after heavyarethecrowns on tumblr who is constantly attacked because she wants her public employees to work and represent her well. Obsessive KM fanatics have hunted down personal information about her family members and started calling her mother at work to try to get her fired. They told her her late boyfriend was lucky he was killed by a drunk driver, because she deserved it and her boyfriend would rather be dead than be with her.

               Or another one on tumblr, I think her name was Libby. When she suffered a miscarriage, obsessed Middleton fans went on her blog and told her both she and her baby deserved to die because she hated Middleton. You want to look for hate and abuse? Look at the Kate Middleton fans, not the critics.

               If W&K truly cared at all about cyberbullying, they would issue statements and continually state that they do NOT support people who cyberbully “as fans”. Instead, when they go after sites online, they only forced the shut down critical blogs but kept the sugar sites up. It was couched under “copyright infringment”, but only critical sites were shut down.

               KM has a habit of doing that. Same pap picture published by two newspapers. One said she looked fine, the other said she looked unhappy. She only filed an invasion of privacy complaint against the one that said she looked unhappy. Same pap photo, only one complaint.

         4. I have to ask Irene, are you only posting here in order to criticize this KMR, this post and the commenters? KMR does not now or has run this site as a “hate blog”, while you make some interesting and thought provoking points by terming this site a “hate blog” imo you just threw away your credibility.

            1. Agreed, Lauri. This is one of the few blogs that consistently questions the official royal PR line that we are all meant to unthinkingly accept.

               I’m interested in the the real contributions made by royalty, beyond the hype that is constantly being churned out. It is everyone’s responsibility to be critical about what is promoted by any special interest group for its own benefit, royalty/ the establishment most definitely included.

            2. Please see my reply to KMR . I commented because I believe that she herself has some doubts about this blog and the way the comments are going.

               I define a hatekate blog as one where very personal abuse of her and her family is allowed, where, whatever she does, a negative view is taken, where actions identical to other royals are condemned only in her, and where a majority of the comments do “attack, demean,and belittle” her. By that definition of course this is a hate blog.

            3. I should have added this before: the critical nature of comments about W+K are often a result of KP PR that claims one thing but just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. There is a lot of spin in those press releases.

               As discussed in a previous post, and by way of just one example, when Kate has cosmetic procedures done, hair extensions, excessively diets and exercises etc, why is she promoted as a natural beauty? It is her decision to have enhancements and so on; why not simply own it? Since Kate is often held up as a role model for women, the problem lies in setting unrealistic goals for those who are easily influenced, and by the way, for her as well.

               Why do William and Kate invent narratives that are simply untrue? The problem lies in presenting themselves as something they are not. When the truth is uncovered, that is not ‘Kate hating’; it is exposing a lie. They need to own that too.

               I agree that name-calling does not enhance an argument, and also that all royals not doing much be called out. If people define themselves as ‘royal’, then they must, by definition, be held to higher standards. In relation to the Middleton family, they have long publicly courted attention for reasons passing understanding. They have employed PR professionals to manage and promote their public personas. This puts them very firmly in the public eye, claiming a particular narrative to influence our opinions of them, to gain social and financial advantages. That makes them fair game, in my opinion.

            4. I love to read what KMR writes and is not a hate Kate blog.With Kate most people are just sick of her not doing nothing
               for years.She is portrayed as workshy and lazy because her record has nothing to back up her work ethic.Other Royal women have had to take on critic’s with no problem . Why is Kate the only Royal that we can’t give constructive criticism too without people saying its being mean and bullying her?Kate is a grown woman and needs to stop worrying about her physical appearance and focus on her charities then maybe some of the criticism will go.

            5. ” I define a katehate blog…” Yes Irene, it is your opinion and you are entitled to it. As we are ours, whether you agree or not.

            6. Amendment: the Middleton’s have made themselves fair game to scrutiny and criticism by actively seeking attention for personal gain.

            7. It is indeed unfortunate Irene, that you have chosen to focus on one aspect of this blog site. Had you taken the time to really read and research this site you would find a caring and compassionate group of people who have supported one another during illness, accidents and family tragedies. I have read many other blogs, some about Kate, some about other things. and while most will have some “negative” commenters on them I’ve yet to find one that has a more caring or compassionate community then is found here at KMR. And as I said before you did offer some interesting and thought provoking points, however I’ve found that individuals such as yourself will primarily come to this site solely to “stir the pot” and then leave the site in chaos, confusion and hurt feelings. If that is indeed that case, then I wish you well on your way out the door.

            8. Irene– I am only going to add that there is nothing bullying about the essence of this blog, which is to examine the actions of royals and critically thinking about whether their actions equal continued public and financial support.

               This doesn’t affect Americans and others not financially supporting royals, but we do buy the magazines and pony up for patronages, etc. We care about causes, and definitely, who leads them. A rubber-stamp figurehead like William seems to want to be does not cut it with many.

               Too many people are struggling to make ends meet or deal with unexpected challenges while royals decide which of their royal palaces to stay at. I love the history and mystique of royalty; I even think there can be an ambassador-like role for them which people may find extremely beneficial. Some like Sweden are getting it right. I think Victoria is going to set the mark for modern-day royalty.

               There is fair, if tough, criticism on here about the Cambs (and others). I think you have a fair point about the below-the-belt names they get called which should be rectified. But criticism is a necessary thing sometimes, and something the rich and entitled get too little of.

               They are not superhuman beings. They are two people in a position of wealth, media attention, and privilege. They deliberately take actions that will bring them public attention–it goes with his position! They both know this. People who expect them to only be addressed with froth should build a time machine so they can go back two hundred years when fealty was all. That time is over.

               Lauri– I completely agree. There is a lot of kindness here.

            9. I agree Lauri. The same thought has crossed my mind as to whether Irene is just posting to criticize the blog owner and commenters.

               I am someone who has tried to post on some of the other blogs and I can’t tell you how much I’ve suffered from the bullying from the Kate Middleton fans on other sites. My mistake for thinking that blogs are for airing one’s opinions. I was literally scarred for life, until I came across this blog.

               Irene, I don’t understand the reason for your post. Aren’t you doing exactly what you are preaching about on negative comments from posters here? I think you need to assess your objective for calling out commenters, e.g., is it only this blog that you are peeved about, or have you done the same on other blogs? I fail to understand how you can state KM is a harmless person. No one here has declared she is harmful to other people, except for the Palace guard who got fired because he stated KM was not a nice person. Additionally, KM is in some ways harmful to young women who use her behavior as a reference point. I wouldn’t want for young daughter to make a man her only focus in life. I think that young women of today are worth much more than sitting around waiting for a man to give some sort of meaning to their lives. Isn’t that waht KM has done? And, do you feel that she is a good example for young women?

               Also, Irene, you do realize that some of us on this blog are US citizens and we are accorded freedom of speech, according to the US Constitution, is that not true? Hence, I think you should do some research before jumping in with both feet first. I take issue with people who feel they have a right to silence other people’s speech, but yet, they feel justified in whatever it is they say, and are oblivious that they do exactly or even worse, to others.

               Anyway, have a nice day and continue to do whatever it is that makes you feel righteous.

            10. I think Irene has left the building…

                I wonder about the motives of people actively seeking out confrontation with those they know won’t agree with them, and then disappear once they and their arguments are taken on face value and rationally discussed.

                Vonnie, I would also ask Irene and her group to reflect on the quality of parenting that sets up daughters to be dependent and wait for a wealthy man; and what qualities Kate brings to her position. Why should we admire her?

            11. Hi Jen, in the past I have asked folks on other sites what in William’s and Kate’s individual and shared work history leads them to believe that once they are the P&P of Wales that they will step up and work hard. Funny, that question has never been answered but I’ve been called lots of nasty names. I too would like to know exactly, other than her hair, smile and weight, what do they admire about the Duchess? Would they want their daughter to emulate her and her “history”?

            12. Hi Lauri, I’d just leave them to their delusions. Some people are blind followers for reasons best known to themselves.

                To expect people to believe PR is hopelessly outdated; and we should, using critical thinking skills to assess every word from those who purport to lead.

                Personally, I’d be citing Kate as an example NOT to emulate. I am genuinely shocked that her parents would raise daughters to sniff out wealthy men, and be so helpless.

         5. I have to say there’s a difference between being critical vs being a bully vs blindly following the narrative that the pr machine puts out.
            Does it matter if we ever meet them? I’m critical and questioning of world leaders that I’ll probably never meet too…
            KMR should be able to sleep soundly at night concerning her blog

            1. Indeed.

            2. I think I’ve never seen so many replies under one of my posts before and apologies of this answer ends up under “wrong” comment as I still try to figure out the reply button when comment has many replies…

               Anyway, I would like to agree with Sarah and others here
               There is a huge difference between criticism and hate and though I don’t agree with all comments on KMR and some go bit too far for my liking I think most people come up with rather constructive criticism and focus on her work or lack of work rather than her body
               also criticising her clothes in terms of appropriateness isn’t hate. The protocol is there to be followed.

               More over you will find many great post about different royals here and to call this a hate blog while most here love royal women for their work seems rather off… also Kate is praised if she does things right and works. I think that’s most just want, her to work and take it serious.

            3. I’m afraid I can’t figure out the Reply button either but let me address some points. I am a Brit so, unfortunately, (assuming most of the posters here are in the US) our time zones don’t match. It was 7.30pm here when I started typing and I have have an hour or so to post before dinner and then the laptop is off until tomorrow. And no, I’m not part of some PR conspiracy – seriously? And I have no interest in closing down blogs – as if I have the power to do so – nor in infringing on your free speech, or your opinions, just as you wouldn’t expect to infringe on mine.

               But you’re right, of course, I won’t be a regular poster, since my views don’t align to the community’s.Being part of a like-minded group can be a joy, and I have seen from posts how you do support one another. What I don’t understand is the peer reinforcement which allows you to get pleasure from continuous,repetitive negativity. For you, Kate is a workshy exhibitionist, who planned with her scheming mother to capture a Prince, who wants the status of royalty without doing the work, who is living off the British taxpayer, without holding up her end of the bargain, whose husband is unfit to be King, and should therefore remove himself from the succession and let Harry be King (lol – an expression I despise but come on, not going to happen ).

               In addition Kate is a rotten mother, conspires with her mother to leak paparazzi shots of her children (never understood this one. Since no British papers publish the shots and nobody cares what the countries who DO publish them think, there’s no PR advantage in the UK, which is the only country that counts for the continuation of the monarchy).

               All tours are only holidays, not work, and nothing is done from good intentions.

               She isn’t a role model, she isn’t pretty enough and- oh the horror – she doesn’t tell us her detailed medical history, if she has extensions, has she had a nose job etc etc. You’ve said it all again and again and no doubt will continue to do so.

               I’m not aware of sugar blogs which attack posters who criticise Kate and I’d be happy to be given names and of course I would condemn fans on such blogs who resort to personal attacks. The blogs I read are Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor, The Fug Girls and Duchess Kate. I haven’t seen what you describe on these blogs but they concentrate on fashion, jewellery, royal history (and DK is excellent at giving full details of the charities involved.)

               Thank you, at least, for giving me food for discussion, KMR.

            4. Irene-

               What exactly do you discuss with your group and why? If you dislike how negative we are, why would you bother discussing said negativity? Why would you want to surround yourself with that kind of negativity? Just… Why bother? Why bother with any of this? You clearly think you’re above my blog, Royal Gossip, Royal Dish, my God never ever ever go to LoveLolaHeart or you’ll have a heart attack, so why not just leave them be and move on with your life instead of reading all the negativity you don’t like? BTW, I’m not telling you to “get a life” since I cannot stand that phrase, it Is so rude and dismissive, I’m legitimately asking why you subject yourself to such torture of reading something you don’t like and then discussing it with a group, because I don’t understand why you would subject yourself to that willingly.

               If you want to look at harassment from Kate fanatics, try posting anything not idolizing on a Yahoo article, those people will come for you.

               PS. I agree with you about Royal Gossip, that’s why I left and have never gone back. I didn’t like how negative they were and I didn’t like how I got attacked for my views (the same views I give here, BTW). I wouldn’t willingly subject myself to that again.

            5. It is simple when I wanted to write a comment who criticizes a speech from Kate about mental health in a blog that it presents itself like the defensor of liberty of expression and that it runs from people that appreciates (not idolizing) Kate, my comment is simply erased and I can’t express myself. I don’t make delation so I will not give you names, I prefer to pass my time on another sites, I just don’t go on this site. Here KMR gives you (and anybody) the permission to express your discord.

               Here people speculates, we say when we love and we
               hate Kate’s clothes (because honestly she doesn’t speak much or repeat the same idea again and again) , we comment, we speak about the good about her, about the bad grammatical structure of message from KP, about some issues from Harry’s messages for Paralympic, about the clothes that we don’t love on other royals, about difference of feeling about Camilla, Mary and Sofia. We know that we speculate, that we don’t have the truth but the truth is not in the press too. We express when we see her or William being better like recently : KMR says that she was happy to see her eat or that they seem to be more engaged. We say that we expect to see these effort on the long term.
               On this site, we can post different opinion without issue : we just agree that at some time we have just different opinion.

               We don’t know if Kate is a good or a bad mother and I don’t remember saying that she is a bad mother, we just say that she has always a nanny even when she is not working. It is her right, I know and it doesn’t mean that she is a bad mother.

               We criticize the lack of clarity of Head Matter Campaign…
               We have the right to criticize and express our opinion like you have, KMR has expressed her opinion about nicknames and since then the nicknames doesn’t occur on this site
               If you don’t like what we write, don’t read it but don’t go frontal on us (it is the feeling that I have when I read) : it is what I understand on my time on Internet

               Personally I don’t like reading blog idolizing Kate because the simple fact of saying that we don’t love some of her clothes is seen like a crime : I dislike some of her clothes ((Even some fan of her seems unable to accept that they can dislike some of her clothes), I don’t think she is a good royal (she doesn’t captivate me by her speechs like Victoria or Letizia can make me, in some events she just looks uncomfortable, I have difficulty to understand what she says when she speaks).
               Because at the end of the day, her fan (the majority) just comments about her look and the charities or her speech disappears.
               What I find sad in the monarchy and in celebrities, it is that fan doesn’t love them for them (because we don’t know really the true personnality of them, we see only glimpse of their personnality and of their PR) but for what they project. Personally I think that Harry is good on engagement, seems like a friendly guy and approachable : it is what I resent when I see him. When I see William, I just don’t feel the same : even him recognizes that he has difficulty to find his path.

               I criticize Kate for spending too much on some of their clothes, 3000 £ for a dress in these times (even not in these times) is just too much for me (like Victoria made today for Alexander’s christening) or for having nearly the same coats or dresses. When you think of it, the Queen is the same with many many coats identical…. I critizice other clothes wearing by other royals, so not against her.

               At the end of the day, I don’t care what clothes she or Will is wearing : I don’t think that they are ready to work more, that they love their work. I don’t appreciate some absurdity and hypocrisy of William’s speech about animals (killing the olders or the ill animals) : not because it is William that says that, but because I think that what he said is stupid. I express my digust on fur clothes on Kate, but I express that on everybody (and some people here doesn’t share the same opinion but it is not serious).
               I don’t just express some critics about them or other royals, I express too my digust of the press when speaking of royalty, the lack of transparency about financial support of royalty by example.

               You give a resume of some idea that we say :
               – workshy : she doesn’t attend many engagements, some charities are not seen each year. (not really working before marriage) it is fact that KMR speaks about.
               – all tour = holiday -> we say that but not exatly that : there will some solid and difficult work in the trip, and yeah there will be some touristic day or activities. Honestly, the hike in Bhutan is not clearly a work day like we can have (and the photographer weren’t here all the time) … And just 15 minutes in a hopital in Australia or NZ (don’t remember where exatly) is just bad for any royal.

               – exhibition : we speak about flashing that there is on nearly each tour. It is here so what : in 5 years, we can suppose that the flashing can disappear. Sorry if it Sophie, Victoria or Mary or me in a ceremony, it is a shame.

               – About physical appearance : some people (like me) express worry about the fact that she seems skinny (some people seeing her reflect that).
               About extensions, botox…. : it is her body she makes that she wants (we don’t know clearly what or if she made) : what I find bad is that medias develop stereotype about the beauty, the good body (weigh) with photoshop : and she contributes indirectly to that scheme (it is the system that it wants that). If she made something and if her fan clearly think that she is a natural beauty that they must imitate (like for any other celebrity) it is dangerous. I repeat this critic is not on her but about the system.
               Press always talk about her appearance and sometimes we do that because we can talk just about what we have (so her look if some journalist doesn’t report anything interesting, after speaking the work of charity like KMR makes with statistics and other informations).

               -> I just express some ideas that I had, in order to answer to some of your elements (like name of blogs when people criticizing Kate can not express themselves).
               At the end of the day, when we look at royals, people will have different opinion about them : indifference, appreciation or not. It is like in the life, we don’t have the same feeling when we see people.

               I don’t wanted attack you, just put some sentiments here. We all agree here that we want that Kate and William grow in their roles (doesn’t mean that we want the death of the Queen^^). And sorry for all the faults, english is not my first language, so my text don’t have shade.

            6. I cannot stomach Royal Gossip, which is sad because there are some knowledgeable posters on there. But the moderation doesn’t exist so I can’t spend any time on there.

               Interesting that Irene doesn’t like CB, as many posters over there consider it to be a refuge from RG and RD and TRF. Perhaps Irene doesn’t like it because one of the employed writers on that popular site isn’t a W&K fan. She tells it like she sees it, she just doesn’t see it Irene’s way. CB is good at letting you mark comments as inappropriate and they remove questionable things quickly.

            7. I have my own issues with CB, and there is a lot of hypocrisy going on there both with the writers and in the comments (I don’t read the royal threads, but the hypocrisy is rampant on other threads). They also don’t let you post certain things for really unknown reasons when comments are not rude or violating their comment policy at all. Merely saying, “It’s rude to make fun of people.” kept getting my comment deleted.

            8. Irene, if this blog is not to your taste, so be it.

               I am still puzzled, though, why you feel the need to express your disapproval here and, should they not pass muster, quite willing to mete out the same to sugar blogs. It does come across as priggish.

               If you disagree with particular thoughts raised here about Kate, tours, and so on, make your argument. People disagree here about a number of issues; however, discussion is both civil and generous.

               I agree with KMR: you and your group’s eyes would burn if you read Lolaloveheart; it does not make for the cosy reading found on your preferred sites. Great writing though, and cuts like a very sharp knife through the palace narrative.

            9. Sorry, this Reply was the nearest one to KMR’s message below.

               why read this blog? I belong to a group of friends who discuss various topics re social media, internet and fandoms (not just royal fandoms) and the research being done on how new media is affecting – or not- the way we communicate.

               I read OoS etc for fun and on one of the blogs came across the concept of the hatekate blog. We decided to explore these and use them for discussion. With CB (I only read Kaiser’s royal blog), Royal Dish, RG, lovelola, Heavy lies the Crown etc, none of us felt it would be worth commenting – they all seemed too extreme and didn’t publish any of our efforts to engage. As I have said, when I read your blog I did feel that you yourself had some doubts at times , so I posted and was published, which I appreciate, and found the responses very interesting.

               I won’t “torture” myself , as you put it, any more , however; where you see criticism, I see abuse, and there is no common ground there. I hope to find time to read your blog from time to time, after the group moves on,. The discussion on the relevance of royalty in the modern day, for instance, was interesting and worthwhile. That’s my kind of discussion.

            10. I think if you wanted to have a conversation in order to actually learn about different points of view on this subject if you are actually interested in it, then you went about it in the completely wrong way. You should have emailed directly and politely asked to have a conversation about it. I would have happily obliged. Instead you insulted me and everyone here. You didn’t bother to ask questions, to learn, you just jumped to conclusions and then insulted everyone with your conclusions. If you would like to discuss this topic with me, then by all means email me (my email is in the side bar), but you must be polite and have a polite, open conversation if you want an actual response back. If your purpose was to insult people in order to get the response you wanted (which is a negative one), well then you succeeded, but that doesn’t help someone actually interested in learning why people think the way they do.

            11. Irene, I’m unclear: you were not published in the blogs you mention when you and your group tried to engage OR that you didn’t feel you would be published?
                “…none of us felt it would be worth commenting – they all seemed too extreme and didn’t publish any of our efforts to engage.”

                If the former, I am surprised your comments were knocked back on Lovelola. I don’t follow the other blogs you mention, but both KMR and Lola have a very high tolerance of differing opinions. I’ve only seen one person’s comments deleted by Lola – actually very recently – because the poster was considered abusive toward others. KMR has said that she has declined to publish a number of people for similar reasons. But that’s about abusive language rather than taking a different view to the moderator. There’s a gulf of difference, I’m sure you would agree.

                I read KMR and Lola because both challenge and unpick the official PR line rolled out, probing further and deeper. Both research their posts extremely well in framing their respective viewpoints. Both are intelligently written. Both posit questions about the future of monarchy, the latter aspect of which also claims your interest: “The discussion on the relevance of royalty in the modern day, for instance, was interesting and worthwhile. That’s my kind of discussion.” I’d suggest that these two blogs are well and truly in that camp, far more so than others that enjoy a greater emphasis on, say, fashion, where questioning the status quo is not really part of their remit.

                As others have said, critique should not be conflated with hate. I take your point that name-calling has no place in mounting an argument. Most critique of Kate and William here is in response to the largely fabricated and self-serving narrative their PR presents to the world. It can be easily unpicked. And it should be under scrutiny; these people are in receipt of huge amounts of public money, and choose to present themselves as leaders based on an hereditary principle rather than on merit. There needs to be greater transparency and accountability of everything royal – full financial disclosure, level of influence of a so-called neutral role, for example – in order for informed, critical debate about its value and future to take place.

         6. Irene I see where you are coming from, I really do. But I have no tolerance for lazy and greedy thieves. Which is what WK are, in my opinion. If you see nothing wrong with 2 grown adults with presumably good physical and mental capacity, his take and take and take from public funding but give very little back (and look sullen & I couldn’t ft when they do have to work in return for their handsome pay and perks), then ppl like WK are not harmless. They are taking necessary monies away from other much deserving causes. They deserve the criticism that they get.

6. This from a woman who wrote disparaging and offensive remarks about her disabled professor on her blog, about how she and a friend kept laughing at his uncontrolled muscle movements.

   1. Go ahead and call me a horrible person but I’ve said some really rude and dumb stuff on Facebook when I was 20 that I’m appalled by now. Hell I’ve said some really rude and dumb stuff on here three years ago that I’m appalled by now. Maybe that’s why I’m more willing to forgive Sofia her past actions such as her blog because I know I’ve said horrible stuff too when I was younger that I am appalled by now.

      People can be horrible to each other, and that’s the point of tackling cyberbullying is to realize that you acted horribly and change your actions.

      1. I have several problems with CP&S on this.

         1) they are not supposed to be working royals, but misogynist Carl-Gustav is letting them continue to suck the taxpayers dry. They’re supposed to disappear into private life.

         2) Cyberbullying is a popular bandwagon, no wonder they’ve jumped on it.

         3) She has said she has no regrets. That would include having no regrets about her appalling attitude towards the disable professor. If she’d own up to it, instead of having it whitewashed, that would be another thing.

         4) Like W&K, my feeling is they think they are being cyberbullied. Much like the Irene-based discussion, CP&S may think that logical criticism on blogs is the same thing as a teen being cyberbullied. Nothing could be further from the truth.

         5) Sophia, her attitude, and her actions make her someone I would not allow around vulnerable, bullied tween and teen girls. Is she going to tell them, like she allegedly told rape victims, that if their self esteem had been better they wouldn’t have been raped? Is she going to advocate makeovers for everyone, as she’s done to other vulnerable girls, as if that is the answer? Base your self-worth on making yourself sexually appealing and your life is better?

         She has made her life – and gotten where she is and gotten everything she wanted – by stripping off and smiling for the camera. That is a dangerous person to have involved with vulnerable teen girls and their self-esteem.

         1. Sofia’s “no regrets” comment was specifically about her nude modelling. Sofia on her time as a nude model and reality-TV star: “Much has been written [about it] over the years, not only following our engagement. For me, it’s pretty boring. It happened 10 years ago, and I moved on with my life. But no regrets. All experiences build a person, although I wouldn’t do it now if you asked me.” We have no idea what she thinks about her comments about her professor.

            Re the rape comments: Sofia *never* said women are raped because they have low self-esteem. She said women who have been raped have low self-esteem because they’ve been raped. There is a giant difference there that people, for some reason, misrepresent. Sofia made the comment in the context of talking about what Project Playground does to help young women and girls in Africa. She said lots of the girls Project Playground works with have been forced to have sex with men in order to get things they need (like clothes), and many of the girls Project Playground works with have been raped and therefore their self-esteem is very low. Condoms may help stop the spread of HIV but it does not help the girls overcome their low self-esteem, so one of the things Project Playground does when working with these girls is help them gain self-esteem and self-respect.

            1. There is ongoing discussion about what she really said, and what was the whitewashed version. As the original comments, especially the early ones, were published in Swedish and subsequently removed? We have no definitive answer as to what she really said.

               The rest stands. I’ve worked with vulnerable teen girls. I wouldn’t let Sofia anywhere near them.

            2. “We have no definitive answer as to what she really said.”

               Neither of us can definitively say we’re right, then. I’m willing to agree that the comments are up in the air since there may have been a translation issue, but then you can’t definitively say she said women are raped because of low self-esteem and say she can’t work with vulnerable girls because of that if the wording of her statement is in question.

            3. And I would like point out that in the interview she used the word “tråkig” which can be translated into boring but in this case she didn’t mean like “yawn boring” but more like sort of sad (but not in a pityful way). Just wanted to point out that she was by no means indifferent by her past.

               And even if Sofia “got what she wanted” I don’t see that she got it because she posed nude or was in a reality show, I see it that she is where she is today in spite of that.

            4. I agree.

            5. Did you miss the word “allegedly”? None of which negates all the other things she did and said, all of which adds up to someone I wouldn’t allow around vulnerable teens. And I wouldn’t want to be funding her lifestyle and having her represent me on a global stage.

               What Sofia wanted was to be rich and famous, to be taken care of by a wealthy man. Living off the man in NYC while flipping a coin about which one of them was going to stay in and take care of his son. Getting money and attention for posing nude and being on what amounts to a sex-based reality show.

               She got what she wanted because of those things, and going after a weak princeling who has a thing for that type of woman. Not in spite of them IMO.

               A man with her track record would not have been allowed into the royal house. Victoria would have had to give up her place in line if Daniel had done the things Sofia did. But a sexist king who has sex scandals and has cheated on his wife for years will let his son get away with anything.

               I have my opinions of Sofia, her motivations, and her being allowed in a public role. In my experience, people like that do not change. I generally avoid posts on her.

      2. That’s true KMR that when we are younger, we say horrible things to each other which we are ashamed of later. But there are some things thst should be a complete no no- and making fun of people with disabilities would fall into that. Sophia was not a child when she made those comments about her professor, she should’ve known better. But she obviously hasn’t been taught better. She can whitewash herself as Princess Sophia and prance around with her meal ticket child, all she likes (let’s be honest, her son is her permanent ticket to living off of a taxpayer funded luxury lifestyle), but she will be the same person with the questionable values and morals that she always was.

7. Glad to see a follow up, though I agree with Herazeus that the bar is pretty low thanks to W&K.

   I hadn’t heard about the disparaging of the professor. She has stuff to atone for.

   Anyone going to watch the christening?

8. I am glad that they are following up on this topic. The Internet is good until it isn’t. What may be entertainment for some, it’s a scary or intimidating place for others. I think it will be hard to measure success on this initiative. The dialogue needs to happen. I’m glad they’ve followed up on their initiative so quickly. So far, Sofia has done a fine job in her role.

   Thanks for this round up, KMR!

9. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3779901/Prince-Harry-voted-world-s-hottest-male-royal.html

   Just to lower the intelligent coversation but relevant as His Royal Hotness did beat Prince CP of Sweden.

   1. As he should have!! CP needs to lay off all that hair gel!

   2. Harry is so very…. 🙂

10. I liked their speech. I give them credit for being so thoughtful and for understanding that it’s not just saying “something needs to be done,” but actually doing something together. That was nice and I want to see some important follow up.

    I believe these two are sincere in their efforts and they seem to be eager to work on this important subject matter to help others. I would like to add that their speech was well thought out and written (even as translated) whereas, often the little words that K and W supposedly pen are not so detailed, or seemingly sincere.

    Too many times people hide behind the anonymity of the internet and say terrible things and bully others. Making this an issue is important and when a couple as prominent as this tackle this subject it helps. I hope they continue their efforts and give them a huge thumbs up for this so far.

11. Unfortunately, I have to take the negative position on Sofia. I think she’s gotten what she wanted–to marry Carl Phillip and be a princess, and now she is playing a role to ensure she can keep the cushy life and attention going.

    She has never really addressed her cruel and offensive remarks against her professor. I’m tired of excuses being made for young people, and fine, if she’s given a pass, I still want to know if she really doesn’t look at handicapped or challenged people demeaningly.

    Sofia has taken flack for her past behavior but she’s also publically apologized and seems to be trying. That’s good and I’m all for it. But she’s given a large amount of leeway too that’s undeserved if she’s suddenly going to be offering to be a leader on anti-bullying.

    She behaved like a bully to her professor. Unless she explains her change of heart, she shouldn’t be offering to lead.

    1. +1

    2. I still have my doubts about her too but maybe she’s changing. Still need a little more time. She could talk about being on both sides of Internet bullying and how being on the receiving end has made her regret her past blogging about a professor.
       On the plus side, I’ll give her props for wearing an outfit that’s not too tight and looks pretty put together.

       1. Me too, I think Sofia could play a huge role if she owns her previous bullying, but I don’t know if she will. She might say “she has no regrets” to this too. I have a son who is autistic, and people that make fun of people with challenges infuriate me. I have a serious issue when people who have never had to account for their behavior act like–“what, me?” if they are finally called out. This usually calls the posse out for protection, which is part of why they were never called out in the first place.

          Bullying is beyond words serious issue. It is ugly, and I am glad that CP Carl and Sofia want to talk about it. But in my book, she’s got to say something about her previous behavior or she can kiss my …. about anything she says on this aspect. If she says she has no regrets, I’d personally would direct her to stay with supporting Project Playground and other initiatives.

          1. The ‘no regrets’ line may be all that is forthcoming. Ultimately, the modelling was her decision.

             Mocking her teacher is just despicable. Due to her position, her comments are part of her narrative and public. They won’t go away. She is duty-bound to address them, far beyond blowing it off in a ‘no regrets’ statement if she intends championing online bullying. Otherwise, what credibility does she have?

             The past is the past but when you put some of the pieces together – the choice of career, mocking a person’s physical disability, curious financial setting up of Project Playground, Sofia’s character traits discussed in Lolaloveheart’s post of 2014 – it doesn’t inspire confidence. But, you never know…

             1. Personally, for me she has no credibility on this issue, and further, I find her engagement on bullying to be noxious. I know that might sound harsh but so were her words to her professor. She has no idea how her words affected. Has she ever checked? This is what crosses my mind–does she know if she did any harm? What about to her friend? Does her friend now go around making fun of handicapped people because Sofia did? I’ve seen a classroom of decent kids transformed into little bullies this year because one kid in my 4th grade son’s classroom was a mean, cruel child that wasn’t checked. Every one is worried about the bullies.

                William is the same. We’ve seen how Kate is worried about stepping on his lead. That’s ridiculous. Maybe she had some sort of issue with the signing, but I would think a girl educated at St. Andrews could spell her name. To me, that was theatre not to “sign before the future King.” If she’s that fearful, she’s been bullied by someone into thinking she needs to act this way.

             2. The examples you give signal that bullies need to be dealt with publicly and with cutthroat precision.

                In the school situation, I would have ascertained the full facts, approached the principal and demanded s/he deal with the issue; if not, I would have given notice that the issue would be escalated further and possibly, publicly. No mercy. A principal has the job to lead and set the culture of the school which should be zero tolerance of bullying and 100% tolerance of difference. If the claim is proven, the bully child would be given an opportunity to give a public apology plus undergo compulsory anti-bullying treatment. If the bullying persisted , exclusion/ expulsion should follow. I’d also be asking what the teacher was doing in this classroom where 40 kids could gang up on one child.

                For Kate to be in such a tizz with signing her name was just appalling. What a message it sends. William has a history of unchecked bad behaviour; why did Kate think it would be different once a ring was on her finger? I think they both manipulate each other. Neither deserves our pity or concern.

                Let’s see if Sofia has the balls to confront her own ghastly behaviour, and call herself out.

       2. As with William, I think it would be great if Sofia were to talk about being on both sides of bullying.

          1. I think both of them don’t think about their behavior as bullying.

             There are a lot of people who have no idea how much their words have hurt some one else. I just had to pull my son out of the school he went to for four years because of bullying. The bullies–and more importantly their parents and support network–create the idea of “might makes right.” They react by shaking it off. They are liked or popular so what difference does the little no one make?

             Until William and/or Sofia and any other royals or protected people take ownership if they have ever treated others in a dismissive or harmful way, this “effort” is pure PR and nothing more. I agree with you that Will IMO has no right, as does Sofia, to say anything about being a bully when they act as bullies.

             1. 100% right, Sunny.

                Trouble is, these leaders, royalty like to present themselves as flawless. Admission of wrongdoing would equal weakness in their eyes. Yet, true leadership should be defined by treating everyone well, no matter who they are. That is real strength of character.

             2. I don’t see William thinking of himself as a bully.
                In regards to Sophia, it would show me that she’s truly trying to move on from her past. The commenter who said it takes chutzpah to model. It actually takes more chutzpah to admit that you were a bully in the past but have learned how wrong you were, especially after being on the receiving end. That you can see words do hurt.
                Jen is right tho, the no regrets comment is telling

             3. Sarah that was me that says she had chutzpah and I definitely agree that it would take more to confront her past. I didn’t know about Sofia’s past, however, it was comment as opposed to a continual pattern. She was also young. I have a daughter who is autistic and I have seen first hand the bullying that she went through. Gratefully she had wonderful special education teachers and a military environment that gave her hands on help. All of my children have been bullied at one time or another, as have I. Unfortunately I also bullied a girl that to this day I feel horrible about them and if I could find her to apologize I most certainly would.

                Because it appeared to be one comment on Sofia’s part, I’m truly hoping that she is setting herself up for an apology and an “ah ha” moment where she states that she decided to do this because of what she said.

                As I mentioned in another posting when they first started this I felt that she thought she was being bullied, as did Kate after becoming royalty that they decided to address this topic. I truly am hoping it doesn’t.

       3. I think the pants suit Sofia wore was very tasteful. I think Kate should give some thought to experimenting with pants suits as they are a very go to ensemble, especially when the weater is cold and windy. I have noticed however, that Sofia also experiments with hair extensions. In the photo with Carl and baby Alexander, Sofia’s hair was much shorter and I don’t think hair grows that fast in a matter of weeks. Kate’s hair has had a huge growth spurt between the time they left for France and returned. Both women would look more chic and sophisticated with a few inches of hair lopped off.

    3. Sunny, I am with you.

       And in general, CP & Sofia are not supposed to be working royals. In Sweden, it is typically limited to monarch, spouse, heir, spouse as it is in Norway too. CP&S are supposed to fade into the background and go earn a living, like Maddie is doing.

       These continual games of pushing them forward as working royals is 1) against the tradition of how the working royal family is structured in Sweden and 2) actively-damaging the monarchy in Sweden. Republican sentiment is rising fast in Sweden. Having even more hangers on, as CP&S are, makes it worse faster.

       1. That’s one of the things I found interesting when I went there. All the travel books talked about how swedes view everyone as equal. So having a royal family doesn’t quite mesh with that narrative. plus, it’s a relatively small county so how they justify so many working royals is even more bizarre. I think mad and Chris are doing it right.
          What I enjoy about royals is the history and of course the bling so would be sad to see that part go but you can’t have it both ways.

          1. 9.5 million people and 6 full-time royals? Makes no sense at all, esp as Charles is looking at 6 people to cover all of the UK (64 million) and Commonwealth.

             Some in Sweden laugh at the idea of calling a former personal trainer a “Prince” and “HRH”. Imagine what they think of being expected to defer to CP&S?

             In the modern world, finding a role for monarchy in an egalitarian society is difficult. I can see the value in a neutral observer, someone who has the job of keeping the politicians from tearing the country apart. There to help, draw attention to needy causes, and serve as a centralizing figure head. It doesn’t have to be hereditary, but it makes it easier to manage if it is. And their lives do not need to be so lavish in return for the work they do.

             The objects that belong to the people – the palaces, jewels, and the years of incredible fashion? They should be accessible to tours most of the year or on display in museums where the people can look at the things that belong to them.

             Both Queen Margrethe and Queen Elizabeth II have had exhibits about their gowns either this year or last. To me, those should always be on display, not kept in a basement gathering moths. When the Queen wants to wear a tiara to a state event, she can get it from the museum instead of her private vault.

             1. I think laughing at the idea of calling a personal trainer “Prince” and “HRH” tells more about the laugher than about the personal trainer.

             2. If those same people are willing to call the blood royals “King/Princess/Etc” and “HRH” then absolutely. If one wants to laugh at the idea of royalty, fine, but it must be all royalty not just non-blood royals.

             3. I actually wanted to ask some of them what they thought about their monarchy but thought it might be weird American girl of me so didn’t! Next time

             4. From what I have seen, it is the idea that someone should be raised above them through marriage into an arcane institution in addition to the silly idea of “born royal”.

                That if they continue with the idea of monarchy, the spouse of the monarch certainly doesn’t need to be deferred to automatically, but that they all (born and married in) have to earn the respect. Start by not giving the heir’s spouse a pile of titles, but have them keep their own name, etc.

             5. Why should the blood royals be given a pile of titles they did not earn?

             6. Who made the decision to put C-P and Sofia on the royal payroll and why? What is the Swedish public’s response? Sorry, I don’t know the background to this.

                It is hard to justify a monarchy in the modern world. The role is largely ceremonial, but costs a bomb to fund. I agree with KMR about ‘royals’ heaping lavish titles on themselves and friends; is it to justify their self-proclaimed specialness and keep the status quo in place? While some people belonging to royal families are thoroughly decent and do their best, others are thoroughly spoiled, being given too much and doing too little in return. I genuinely believe that such unnatural cushioning from life and people is detrimental to their personal development. But, you know, it’s up to the citizens of these countries to decide what it’s all worth to them. Monarchy certainly seems an anomaly in egalitarian Sweden, but seems to be part of Britons’ identity in class-ridden UK.

                I disagree that monarchy is best placed to be a keeper of out-of-control politicians or being a neutral arbiter. There is nothing intrinsically better about royals. Giving them that power indicates passivity on the part of citizens, being unable to make decisions, or just being plain lazy. Citizens can control politicians by demanding better behaviour, policies etc; it’s called voting, and everyone has a responsibility to give back to their community by being involved.

                If a neutral voice is needed, there are plenty of intelligent people about. Royals are not neutral – they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Charles, for example, with the Queen, has lobbied for several issues, including (1) successfully being excused from complying with the Freedom of Information Act (2) having the public resource, Duchy of Cornwall, become BRF private property; not sure of the status of that. Charles has also lobbied vociferously, even admitting to being a ‘meddling prince’ as the ‘black spider’ memos to ministers attest, and considered as exerting undue influence. The BRF is also given a huge number of concessions not available to its citizens.

                I can assure you, royals are not required for Australia. Apart from current constitutional arrangements that will change, they don’t figure in our lives except when they are having a royal tour (aka holiday) for reasons passing understanding.

             7. Jen, that’s why I said it is easier if it is inherited but it doesn’t have to be. Like in Canada where there is an elected PM and a selected short-term Governor General. The idea being someone above politics not part of it. If people who live in monarchies want the centralizing figure of an inherited monarchical role, that is their choice, but not something I’d choose.

                KMR, the amount and type of titles in Sweden strikes me as silly. Carl Gustav is going his Oprah impression (You get title! And you get a title!) instead of strictly limiting them to the main line. There is no such thing as royal blood. Their titles now are inherited job titles anyway, nothing more.

                If their employers (taxpayers) do not like the job titles, change them or get rid of them. King Carl-Gustav and Mrs. Silvia Bernadotte. CP Victoria and Mr. Daniel Westling. The spouses do not need titles to fulfill their role. In the Swedish system, I’d say only the first born of the heir should get a title.

                The idea of Charles saying Camilla would not be Queen but Princess Consort. I don’t agree with it on the grounds of anything against Camilla, but I like the idea because it addresses gender inequality in the system. King and Queen should be equal titles. IF the spouse is going to have a title, it should be King and Prince/Princess Consort, Queen and Prince/Princess Consort (if anyone enters into a same-gender union).

             8. Nota, the titles sure do get out of hand! The precedence ties them all up in knots. Giving babies the Order of the Seraphim is…indulgent. It will be interesting to see how Swedes process the concept of monarchy, which seems to be at odds with their overarching philosophy.

                I think Ireland has achieved a good balance with its choice of Presidents thus far. The problem with a Governor-General is that he/she is the Queen’s representative rather than being an independent arbiter in their own right. That can cause problems: in 1975, the elected government of Australia was sacked by the Queen’s representative, the reverberations of which still impact Australian politics.

                The thing is, no human is perfect, no-one has perfect judgement all the time. Whoever takes on a such role needs to have impeccable credentials, ethically and morally, along with sound judgement and intelligence. I’d like to think such people can be found amongst us rather than accepting an hereditary appointment where those qualities may not be in evidence.

             9. Jen, I was thinking about that last night when watching one of the Star Trek retrospectives. A group of actors, writers, etc. were discussing the influence of Star Trek.

                They were asked to name their favorite captain. Most went with Kirk. Another went with Picard, because he embodies everything we wish our leaders could be. A lofty goal when we’re all human and make mistakes, but to him Picard was the closest to the ideal of who should be leading – even though he seemed too perfect to be human.

12. KMR — I hope you’re aware that the purpose of comments like Irene’s is for you to shut down this website entirely, and for everyone here in stop ever commenting on Kate. In fact, I think people like Irene are more threatened by blogs likes yours and leadership such that you display on her BECAUSE you attempt to moderate the comments, and you cut down on bullying and insults. It makes your website far, far more dangerous than the gossip sites that allow personal attacks and insults to flourish. It means your criticisms are valid. And what people like Irene are looking for are for valid criticisms of Kate to not be aired.

    You cannot control every comment on this blog, or the Internet. You shouldn’t feel compelled to. Irene is deliberately trying to manipulate you, especially by using the personal things you’ve revealed on the blog against you. “Her” behavior is the lowest of the low, because it is such a transparent attempt at being manipulative. It is all designed to silence you, and it’s been planned by an organized group:

    “I have been studying a handful of katehate blogs for discussion with my group…”

    They go after you because of your decency and because you show uneasiness with other people’s behavior that does cross lines.

    We make off-hand remarks based on tabloid pictures; I can promise you that “groups” like Irene’s, which inevitably end up turning on famous people after their love affair is ultimately shown to be one-sided, are considered by security experts to be the far greater threat to the Cambridges and I am sure considered far more of a nuisance by her staff, as they must be treated with kid gloves.

    Introspection is a good thing, and wanting to put a quality product out into the world is, too. And moderating your own tone as you see fit, again, all good things. But responding to a coordinated campaign led by those so obsessed with a public figure they undertake crusades on her behalf isn’t.

    1. To clarify, I did not mean responding as within this thread. I meant responding on a greater level, like shutting down.

    2. +1

    3. +1

    4. +1

       I do wonder if Irene and other posters who have come on recently (the concern trolls who are worried about our soul’s because of our comments) are independent fans? Or are they on Jason’s payroll?

       Years ago, one of forums tracked a bunch of pro-Kate comments to the PP IP address…

    5. +1 well said

13. I define a hatekate blog as one where very personal abuse of her and her family is allowed — Far worse has been written in the British tabloids over the last decade than has ever been written here, and plenty of it was even true.

    where, whatever she does, a negative view is taken, where actions identical to other royals are condemned only in her — The British Royal Family is the most important and powerful in the world and she is the mother of its future King. Her position is not identical is any other royal in the world. If she is held to a higher standard, such is the price of such power.

    and where a majority of the comments do “attack, demean,and belittle” her. — You consider any criticism of her those things.

    By that definition of course this is a hate blog. — Or a place where rational people who don’t want to read horrible sexual comments about her still want to comment that the future Queen of England should not wear such tight pants. Oh, the humanity. What an attack, what a belittling, how will she ever cope.

14. I’m occasionally surprised by a few of the posters who call Kate and Will disparaging nicknames, good for nothing, and other levels of vitriole. Occasionally, I think removing a post would be something to consider. But in general I think the critique stays above board. And I have appreciated your devil’s advocate position, KMR, because it challenges some of my own preconceptions.

    I do hope that CP and Sophia will continue in a substantive fashion. I appreciated the depth in their speeches. It could go one way or the other. But with Viktoria (sp?) and the other members of the SRF as role models I think it’s likely they’ll rise.

15. I thought it was interesting that she lumped you in with Royal Gossip and Royal Dish. I find the former to be particularly juvenile and the latter to be often vicious in its criticism, to the point that I am sometimes surprised when people comment favorably on something. I like Celebitchy, there’s a lot of intelligent commentary there, too. And when people get upset about someone trash-talking their idol, they’ll often point out that bitchiness is in the name of the blog.

    The other part of the name also speaks to the difference between unpleasant online commentary and bullying. I think it’s important to differentiate between criticising public figures and private ones, between what is a private (by online standards) conversation on a public forum (like this blog) and insulting someone directly on their own facebook page.

    My issue with the anti-internet bullying programs is that I assume it’s in response to private people, often underage, who are attacked as they interact with their peers online, on facebook-type pages. It’s not the same as laughing at a public figure, like Taylor Swift or David Cameron. They’re adults, they’ve chosen their careers knowing that public commentary would be part of the package. And those insults are often valuable as they allow the public to blow off a little steam peacefully and to inform said public figures to rethink their approach to an issue. Yes, some of the trolls at the Daily Mail need to have their mouths washed out with soap, but I’m not yet ready to classify them as internet bullies.

    1. Daily Mail comments are its lifeblood, and all those clicks make them money. A public forum is just that and the reader knows pretty quickly whether it’s for them. As you say, public figures use social media effectively but also enter into that arrangement knowing the deal.

       I really don’t understand people wanting to put personal things on these digital platforms. It’s akin to opening your doors and windows and being surprised when you are burgled. There is such pressure to conform, to join up, give away your personal data etc just to be ‘liked’ and ‘followed’ by people you don’t know and will never meet. Parents need to be very careful how their children are introduced to social media, how to navigate it and retain privacy. It’s really tricky. I wonder if the parents of these online bullies know what their child is up to? I wonder about them being fit to parent. Should they be held legally responsible for the actions of their children? That might change the game.

       1. It’s very difficult for a parent to be on top of their child’s social media usage. There are so many platforms and they allow you to customise exactly who can see what. It’s very easy for a child to limit what their parents can view and they can also have “secret” accounts that their parents know nothing about. Also with apps like Snapchat where your snaps disappear after a while it’s difficult for a parent to keep track.
          Cyber-bullying is unfortunately much more difficult to counter than normal bullying but I hope CP and Sofia are serious about this and pursue it until some solutions are found.

          I had no idea Sofia had bullied someone before. How well this program does might depend on how willing she is to confront her own past to give it more credibility and also to start a public discussion of what leads people down the path of bullying in the first place and how parents and schools can try and counter these incidents.

          1. Also, kids don’t really want their parents to see what they’re doing, even if they are not doing anything wrong, especially if their parents don’t approve of social media. I remember I got on Facebook even though my mother told me not to, and I just didn’t tell her. Kids want privacy, and having social media is actually a way to keep some privacy from their parents. Because kids can have private conversations on social media which their parents cannot see even if their parents can see their public profile.

16. KMR is no where near the level of Royal Gossip or Royaldish and i think that poster is being deliberately provocative in lumping you in with them.

    When did criticism become hatred or bullying? When did bullying or hatred become criticism.

    Does Irene feel as strongly about what’s written about the Yorkies? Across all media, from internet to mainstream media? *There* is bullying and hatred for her group to discuss and be appalled.

    The Cambridges use PR to deflect from their inability to follow through on the contract they have with the public.

    Further, they push a fairytale narrative of romance and beauty to distract the public.

    Quite frequently they fall short and or are caught out in lies.

    All of which might be overlooked if not for the global platform they are placed and the taxpayer funding that maintains them whivh leads us back to that contract they accepted with the public.

    1. There is a pattern of behaviour from the ‘Irene’s’ who periodically jump onto this site: they plant a bomb with just one purpose, to disrupt. They can’t prosecute their case through sustained argument, as witnessed in this recent exchange, so just disappear.

       I would not be surprised if this was part of a larger strategy to shut down critique/the site; this blog has a high profile. It seems plausible given money is spent creating favorable comments on comments sections of mainstream papers.

       However, critique is not bullying. The Cambridge PR machine has created a false narrative that keeps falling over. Misdirection and outright lies will not fix it.

       1. KMR – went to edit, and could not do so; 3.5 minutes left at that stage.

Comments are closed.