Newsweek conducted an interesting poll about what the average British citizen really thinks about the royal family – you can see the breakdown of the results here. The highlights: Prince Harry is by far the most popular figure in the royal family, even beating out the Queen. Prince Harry is the most popular, followed by the Queen, Prince William and then Kate in fourth place. The breakdown of the numbers in other areas is interesting too – 66% of men said “they would not want to be Kate’s friend, husband or boyfriend” and 15% of all respondents said they would never want to be or know Kate. Three percent think Kate is “lazy” and 22% think Kate’s body has become “public property.” Speaking of… popular Aussie feminist writer/thinker Germaine Greer has some thoughts about Kate and the royal family:
Feminist thinker Germaine Greer has said that the Duchess of Cambridge has a “bastard of a job” and dismissed the the royal family a “mad anachronism” in a strongly-worded interview with Newsweek Europe.
“Kate is a great deal more intelligent than the rest of the royals,” said Greer, the author of the 1968 book The Female Eunuch, a canonical work of 20th-century feminism. “She has been put in charge of William.”
Referring to Kate’s chronic morning sickness, hyperemesis gravidarum, which she has struggled with both in her previous and current pregnancies, Greer said that the Duchess is under too much pressure to reproduce in her role as royal consort.
“[Kate] is vomiting her guts up and shouldn’t have been made to go through all this again so soon,” she said. “It’s not so much that she has to be a womb, but she has to be a mother. I would hope after this one she says, ‘That’s it. No more’.” Greer also suggested that Kate’s high-profile role in public life might have triggered unhealthy eating habits. “The girl is too thin,” she said.
Deploring a perceived lack of agency, Greer claimed that Kate’s personal freedoms have been largely curtailed by her position in the royal family. “Kate is not even allowed to decorate her own houses. Even the wives of the American presidents get to do that. The whole thing is a mad anachronism. The ‘firm’ tell us that the first born will now become the monarch regardless of sex. Well, big f–king deal! She cannot do or say anything spontaneous. She has learned what she has to do and say and how to do and say it in the approved way. Spontaneity will get her in trouble,” Greer added.
Greer observed that Kate, who achieved two As and a B at A-level and an upper-second class degree in history of art from St Andrews, one of Britain’s top universities, “is not allowed to have an interest in modern culture, even in art – to collect, to attend openings.”
We debate this a lot, “What Kate Is Allowed To Do” versus “What Kate Is Unwilling To Do.” I personally think Kate is “unwilling” to do more, but many think that the powers that be (William, Charles, the Queen, the Men In Grey) are imposing rules on Kate’s behavior, clothing and work schedule. I will say this – I think Kate got pregnant again because she wanted to. I think she genuinely wanted another baby. And she wanted a post hoc excuse for why she and William were moving to the country. While I’ll definitely admit there are feminist issues with Kate’s agency over her body, her image and her time, I’ll also say… this is what she signed up for. This is why she was a Waity for nine years. She knew the deal.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I’ll do a quick poll round my (UK) house for you, hold on…
Findings are:
100% do no give a f*** about any of the so-called royal family. “Mad anachronism” indeed.
Vive la revolution!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
That’s about what my friends over there say. Especially regarding Will and Kate. They are celebrities that are famous for family and marriage. No one really cares all that much except the older set and girls who aspire to marry wealthy and be kept. And that Americans are so infatuated with the concept of royalty.
Dear Kate – call queen Letizia. Or google her. Now…. Do everything she does fashion and makeup wise. Next call Angelina Jolie or google her. Do everything she does charity wise. There. I fixed her guys.
Love that polling only took 2 minutes. LOL.
Moxy, you should visit some Spanish gossip blogs… in some of them they despise Letizia with a passion, and they say much worse about their Royal family than we can read here at CB… really. They criticise everything, I bet it all comes down to having to pay for their lifestyle, but Letizia is criticised worst than anyone.
Ennie
There truly is no pleasing some. There will always be a crowd for gossip. And while Letizia has a great work ethic and style she isn’t perfect. She gets botox. She has a previous marriage. And having a career before her current marriage isn’t seen by all as good. More that it created opportunities for people to disect her every move.
It’s terrible.
Letizia displays awareness of her position and of the people that both willingly and not so much pay for her lifestyle. This means more than a few pap walks and photo ops. She’s educated. And she hasn’t stopped self improvement. She has her faults, but I think there’s more good than bad.
And there’s a filter on these threads. I’m guessing they’d get retty awful here if it could.
•Florc•
You nailed it. No one person can please all. QEII, QMII, Q Maxima, Q Mathilde, Q Letizia, CPss Victoria, and CPss Mary are all fantastic Royals — and yet — they have their naysayers too. There’s more superb female Royals but all of them, regardless of nationality, come with criticism which some is very fair while others is really beyond the pale.
LadySlippers
This is why so many here were wondering if you and some others would return! Dame Snarkweek has been another among other names.
Recently it’s been some that will only pick Kate and William apart. No real side of reason. Neither can do anything worth praise. Many of us left or debated to no end.
Though based on just some simple facts I think those ladies on paper certainly demonstrate a high respect or understanding of their position. I don’t think Kate really understands her position is more than just a wife to William. And I don’t think she wants to.
“They criticise everything, (…) but Letizia is criticised worst than anyone. ”
True. Even before she married Felipe, they called her (in droves!) “putizia”.
I hope I do not have to translate that.
About Germaine Greer… I wonder why she finds Kate so endearing when she tore Diana apart – brutally so.
(And I am not even a Diana fan!)
I like many of Greer’s thoughts, but she is not immune to hypcrisy and other “bourgeois” defects.
P.S. Also, I don’t understand the “too thin” argument. “Too” thin for WHAT?
She is thin. Period. Clearly she is healthy enough to displace herself without aparent suffering AND to bear children.
Unless Greer &Co. think she is too thin for their personal taste.
It’s true. They just have no relevance. It’s not like they make any important decisions or make any difference to our day to day lives. They occasionally provide mildly diverting gossip – Harry’s fancy-dress Nazi costume was certainly enlightening – but that’s it. I paid attention to the first spawn of the other 2 morons for approx 3 seconds because I thought it might be a girl and was interested in the change of succession rule from a feminist point of view. But they’re celebrities for the tourists. I wish we could get rid of them for good. They aren’t vaguely representative of MY England.
No shits given from this Canadian household. Stephen Harper, on the other hand, thinks it’s super-important.
That creep Harper thinks anything that distracts from his “job” of changing and dismantling Canada is important. Canadian here too… a very disgruntled one at that.
Just waiting for Hello to feature Wills $ Kate on a fishing trip in the Canadian Wilderness with Stevie, Peter Mackay and Nazanin (who has better fashion and makeup sense than Kate) via Military Chopper.
Stephen Harper is the “sh-ts”.
Of course I don’t really know, but I think Kate enjoys being a mother, and enjoys the public adoration of her son, and wanted to get pregnant again. Germaine Greer has such a know-it-all attitude about Kate and how she feels. I find it annoying. Does she even know her?
Not only that but does she have to be so borderline angry? It’s not her life, it’s not something young girls can really aspire to (unlike, say, a pop star or a model) because how many “princess positions” are there to fill? She’s not a role model for young women in terms of her job so what is the problem here? Also, let’s not pretend Waity didn’t know exactly what she signed up for. And btw: “’The girl is too thin,’ she said.” Seriously? A feminist thinker? Complain about pressure and what she’s not allowed to do and then throw your own little judgment on top of that?
I do think it’s hilarious how few public engagements the “girl” (really?) takes on and if I were a UK citizen, I’d be miffed. But come on. She picked that job.
Right. I often criticize her for not doing more, but Greer seems just what you said – angry and claiming to know things she couldn’t possibly know.
having kids 2 yrs apart is not uncommon, i cant see how it is some plot
Yea it’s not. Maybe it’s a happpy coincidence to avoid work, but I can’t back that theory.
And wasn’t this always the way? Kate would birth the spare so both children would be close in age like William and Harry?
Now if there”s baby number 3? I’ll absolutely agree Kate is in charge and doing as she pleases. Until then it’s all nonsense.
•Florc•
Hey there! 😊
Kate has made it clear she wants three children because she and her siblings are so close. Other than both clearly wanting a happy family, I’m not sure how that’s bad. Ya know??
LadySlippers!!! I missed you! Hope everything’s ok. So good to see you!
Ladyslippers!
Hooray, thought you’d run off with the circus. Lovely to see you back…..how about a G&T?
🙂
LadySlippers!
Huzzah! You’ve been missed!
To the comment.
I brought up the child #3 possibility as an example. If Kate truly has no say in her reproductive schedule baby #3 will not happen. William made it clear he only wants 2. He doesn’t seem like he’s changing his mind and keeps sticking to heir and spare. Never even hinting at more.
If there is a 3rd child it will demonstrate Kate has more say in the relationship and isn’t fully controlled. And ofcourse, it’s not a bad thing if she wants a 3rd.
Also, that article stating Kate wants 3 like her siblings… I’m on the fence without direct quotes. Unless i’m missing the time when she did make this clear.
•Chris2•
A G&T? Oh dearie, I’m always game for an afternoon delight! 😉
•Florc•
I’ve missed a lot of you too!!! {{HUGS}}
There has been more than one article stating she wants 3. However, my guess is that it’ll depend on whether she can do another rough pregnancy knowing that her first bout with severe morning sickness wasn’t a fluke. And lots of couples want a different number of children; part of marriage is finding that happy medium. But I’d bet that William ends up saying ‘sure honey, let’s try for #3 if you’re up to it.’
LadySlippers
I guess time will tell. As is the case with most things.
And for whatever reason took you away I hope everything is well now!
I agree.
It’s 5 minutes of wasted reading time, that article was so preposterous.
•GoodNames•
Hello Dahling!
😊
Dahling! I have so missed your little face!
•Dahling•
You’ve been missed so so much!
*kiss kiss*
As I have said before.. I think she could do more and be more vocal about causes that are relevant in the UK..
but I think the Royal family didn’t want another Diana. They didn’t want anyone to outshine William. Harry has it better because to a greater degree he can be himself. There will not be another Diana.. even through her sons.
but Kate is pregnant again. I swear I keep forgetting that. I not following them but I don’t see that much interest or excitement over the baby.. maybe that will change when she is seen again.
A lot to consider but this:
“She has been put in charge of William.”
Do not grok at all.
I really think it’s a nightmarish prospect to be in that role which is why no woman of substance would marry William. Whatever Kate’s personal feeling on children it’s her central duty to bare two children to pretend that doesn’t factor in at all is naive.
That being said it’s disappointing that Ms. Greer chose to body shame Kate to prove her point.
It is sad.. but you never here that about someone being to heavy anymore.
Skinny is the new way to attack a woman. What does that have to do with anything. If a man had said that people would be up in arms.. but women do that all the time to other women then whine about women being objectified by their bodies.
It starts at home.
Not so true. There’s many woman in the light being body shamed as too thick. Kate Upton comes to mind. Lena D. KimK. Women will be attacked for any body shape. As long as there are those who want to attack them and need a reason.
Wow, Greer on CB! I hope I can find the article, she’s always interesting, even when she has her wacker moments. Definitely one if my female ‘saints’. I adore her to bits.
(Oh, btw The Female Eunuch came out in 1970.)
Re WIlliam, I was hoping to hear her speak about Kate having a role as an actual minder, making up for his unfitness (?) with the hoi polloi.
And the art comment….indeed she could do something about emerging artists like buying a dump, turning into studios….etc etc. She could certainly use her degree as a frame for some kind of patronage. But Greer says she’s discouraged from enjoying the art scene.
Edit: doubt very much that she knows her……Germaine gives out about all kinds of subjects, and ‘opinionated’ was coined for her! 🙂
Even taking into account that Dr Greer always shoots from the hip, speaks out with no filtering etc, I think that finding any ‘body-shaming’ here is the wrong impression.
She’s being entirely sympathetic, and don’t most Kate threads have yards of comments avout Kate’s frailness since the wedding?
(I’d better mince off out for a walk….or I’ll get into a Greer fight!)
The queen has one of the most magnificent art collections in the world. Kate IS on the art scene! She probably really enjoys the queens collection and borrowing pieces for her house(s).
Senaber
I know that, natch. And it really is a wonderful collection, so Kate must be happy about sudden access!
But I was thinking about other engagement with vizart, perhaps like the Prince’s Trust, for young artists. A junior Royal Academy! Seriously though, I’d imagine stdio space is the greatest problem, in London at least.
Of course, when it comes to ’emerging’ artists, you open the floodgates, tis a nightmare.
What else might she get off the ground? Something where her degree gives her right of entry, as it were. I said before that I’d love to see the royal collection (or part thereof) actually displayed…..perhaps Kate could surround herself with advisers about a location/building/perpetual funding.
She’s got a long career ahead of her….some huge project like that could engage her without demanding vast amounts of time.
There’s the RSA…..Philip’s a Fellow. Perhaos she could be behind some new venture there, linked to the visual arts.
Anyhoo, just pondering.
•Chris2•
Interestingly enough, Junor’s recent book about Harry gives hints that the BRF might be looking into changing how they use their name. Traditional patronages might not be the future which I thought was very interesting (and not one I contemplated either).
Ah I see Chris2! I thought that the criticism about her pursuit of art had more to do with her personal interests rather than charity. You make a very good point! She would be lauded as a champion of the arts if she chose to pursue it.
what i agree with is that the royal family is an anachronism. you can keep it because it attracts tourists and is good for gossip but i dont think anyone would want them to have any real power.
but Kate knew what she signed up for. the entire job of her is to make babies, that can not be surprising. if she is intelligent or not does not matter, she did not want to become a world renown scientist but the wife of William and i will go as far and say not the wife of William but the wife of PRINCE William.
everyone knows how much pressure there is in such a position and you also know that you have to procreate so i dont get it why thats even brought up.
oh and Greer is a very problamatic feminist. she relentlessly attacked male to female transgender people. she published a book about teenage boys for women to sexualize: “Well, I’d like to reclaim for women the right to appreciate the short-lived beauty of boys” claimed that men hate women but women cannot hate men etc.
Agree. As the real feminist thinker Bridget Jones (just kidding) referred to her, Germaine “sodding” Greer is probably going on about nothing. She’s likely never met Kate or William, and doesn’t know people with access to really personal information about them. I think there’s so much speculation about their character and intentions in the media and blogs because hardly anyone outside their tight circle of family, friends and staff gets more than a few minutes of exposure to them at any one time. Kate rarely speaks beyond making general platitudes and William, well, he works when he works. So, how much can Ms. Greer really say about them but repeat what she reads or hears in the news? Not much more than we can, I imagine.
What’s wrong with having babies? I had 3 in 4 years, and kind of raised them as one child, they were so near in age. That has translated into siblings that are close and supportive adults.
Women’s bodies are capable! Greer is whining about what is actually kind of normal. I am a fit and healthy woman. Families are the ultimate joy in life, and can’t be bought as mere goods.
•wolfpup•
According to Dr Helen Fisher (and others), the ideal spacing for having babies is about 4 apart because having babies takes a huge toll on a mother’s body. However, life is rarely ideal and I agree, if Kate and William want children close in age — who am I to say otherwise?
I think this particular criticism is just another way to needlessly attack people for their choices. Even if Kate was unable (or William) to have children — live still goes on (as would the BRF). They both wanted a family, hooray for them that they are able to achieve that goal.
life* not live
Sorry!
I don’t think Sara is criticizing Kate and William for wanting babies so much as she’s emphasizing what others have said, and that is royal babies (heirs) are expected (required), and that Kate knew this when she married William. Personally, I have 3 children. In fact, I had 2 in one year! Ha! They are twins, actually, and raising them has been both challenging and wonderful. I think Kate really does want 3 kids; she wants to model her new family life after her own childhood. But, I don’t believe she has strong aspirations to do anything beyond being a good wife and mother. I don’t criticize her for that, but at some point she is going to have step up to the plate and become an actively working royal like CP Mary. Whether she’ll have the self motivation and fortitude for the role is yet to be seen.
•Olenna•
I actually disagree. We forgot that all Royal institutions* are filled with human beings that understand that life is more than just shoulds and requirements. If Kate and William had not been able or wanted to have children — they could have chosen that route and life would have continued. Lines of Sucession are in place for a reason.
*Save the Japanese Imperial Household — they make my blood boil. There are a few others (Saudi Royal’s) but not many.
*Olenna* Imagine being able to choose your favorite thing, and be its champion to the world. The ability to do such a thing is amazing, and it will be interesting to see how Kate chooses to use this gift. You know about the challenges of baby time. Those early years were the hardest thing I’ve ever done. There is so much time left after babies, to do the other things that are favorite. Maybe the young royals just need to act *friendly* for a while.
@Ladyslippers & Wolfpup, your points are well taken. My thoughts on this couple’s “heir and a spare” duty are probably stereotypical of the mind-set of a by-gone era and perpetuated by the media (I really do need to stop reading the DM; I lose a brain cell every time I do!). But, I think Kate came in to this marriage with not just her own and her family’s desires to reproduce, but that same mind-set. Twice the pressure, twice the births. Baby number 3 will be her personal goal to complete her own idea of a family and emulate the life of her mother, the one person, I think, Kate looks up to more than PW and the Queen, herself. And, (I’m seriously asking people to read b/w the lines here) if she can live the life of a full-time mother and supportive wife with no pressures to ever extend herself beyond that role when PW becomes the heir apparent or even King, she’ll be content.
•Olenna•
That’s exactly it. The stereotypes ARE of a by-gone era which the media promotes because it sells. The media also (in which many RFs contribute to it as well) treats the members of many royals as commodities that strips them of their humanity. Such a shame.
As for Kate, I honestly think she and William *knew* they wanted a family. Which has someone else pointed out, dovetails nicely with what any extended family would like. Whether they have 2 or 3 children will always depend on a great many things but both stated they wanted a family.
Uh, maybe she was a Waity because she actually loved the guy. And I can’t imagine anybody wanting to repeat the discomfort of her first pregnancy just as an excuse to move to the country. She and her family will have more freedom of movement in the new place than in the old, hard to quarrel with that.
Y’all can now commence with the usual screaming about taxpayer’s money being wasted etc. Wonder how that compares with what the UK has spent following along with the US in pointless wars? What about the cost of security for Harry while he was running around in a war zone? Those wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been incredibly expensive for US taxpayers, would be interesting to see the UK figures. Just as a reference point for wasted taxpayer money. I know that the US government likes to drop million-dollar bombs (lots of them), for instance, which makes other kinds of non-destructive government spending seem downright frugal.
It’s not either/or though, is it? Can’t I just moan about my tax pounds going on BOTH?
FWIW, Britain has spent approximately £30bn on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined. One Tomahawk bomb costs £850k, and the House of Commons is debating dropping many of them on IS as I type this comment.
I suppose if you look at it like that, the BRF is a really cheap old waste of money at a mere £200m a year!
•Sixer•
Hello! Things going well?
HELLO SWEETIE! Really glad to see you. I’m good. Hope you are, too.
•Sixer•
It’s been both good and bad. 😳 But I’m still hanging in there.
BTW, books still have editors right? Lol. I keep coming across books that I think their editor slept through the book. It’s sad….
Sorry to hear there’s been bad times, but glad to hear you’re hanging in there.
It’s the worst of the worst of the worstest of the clan McWorst, ain’t it? Bad editing, if you notice it, jerks you right out of the flow of a book.
•Sixer•
That was pure Dr Suess! And the McWorst-ests grow every day…
*Snuffles off sniffling*
BTW.
Yes. You Sixer are allowed to have your cake and eat it too. As long as a few of us can savour the crumbs… (and frosting? Can I at least have a taste???)
*drools over Moan & Grumble cake*
It was plum crumble tonight!
•jwollman•
According to several sources Harry had zero security while he was in Afghanistan. True for both deployments. He was treated as no different than any other soldier which is exactly how he likes it.
And according to Penny Junor’s Harry bio, Kate actually DID fall in love with William, the man, and not William, the prince. Also, Junor has a fantastic argument about how important all three are to not only the British monarchy but to the overall worldview on Britian as a global brand. Junor, like you, mentions how politicians frequently waste money and unlike the expense with the royals, there is no return for the tax payer.
Overall, her book is awesome if you can stomach the horrible put downs to both Diana and Charles (Diana’s criticisms are often nasty and totally expected but Chsrles, IMHO, actually fairs worst because she’s trying to paint him in a favourable light and fails miserably. Every ‘compliment’ is very, VERY backhanded. Ouch.) It also paints the boys in a much different light and I thoroughly enjoyed that aspect.
Geez, it’s great to see you Lady Slippers! All the information you share is so fantastic – you are such an asset!
LadySlippers,
I am so glad you are back!!!! I went missing myself from making comments but did read and suddenly you were gone. I was getting ready to go off-thread and ask about you!
As for me, I have little time to comment lately but am glad you are here 🙂
P.S. Your bloom is so beguiling 🙂
•wolfpup•
Hello my dear! I read a lot. A LOT a lot. Lol And am always finding things to challenge my previous world views — which I adore. 😊
•Tulip•
I left for many reasons…but it’s all good. And I’m glad to finally see you too! 💐💐💐
“And according to Penny Junor’s Harry bio, Kate actually DID fall in love with William, the man, and not William, the prince. ” She may bill herself as in insider, but Junor is not inside Kate Middleton’s mind or the minds of the Middleton family. She is expressing an opinion about what she *thinks* Middleton’s motivation was, but has no more factual an answer about that than anyone on this site.
I remember reading about a study that set out to find if a person could love another on a very honest and peronal level without outside factors of money, family, etc…
It’s was extremely rare that the person fell in love without those other factors.
And once any form of financial stability was introduced the man became more desirable and the less handsome guys were valued more with greater weal than the handsome guys with still considerable weath, but not as large.
End of the day you’re always adding in security and not simply falling for the man, but the whole package.
•notasugarhere•
Fair enough points.
BUT I find it extremely interesting that biographers have almost universally painted a different picture of Kate (or any other royal) than what the tabloids do. And the tabloids have been repeatedly drug into court over false allegations which rarely happens with biographers. I’m not saying that biographers don’t skew things but what would it gain anyone for *all* of them to whitewash stuff? Some have very little love for the BRF and still they show the royals in a much different light than the tabloids. Kate now has some fairly well respected biographers speak highly of her (even if it’s focusing on other people). That’s gotta count for something.
I’m starting to wonder how much any of us really know about people! I mean that — including me. So far every book I’ve read about a famous person has given me nuggets that no tabloid touches or deems interesting.
None of us will ever know, and neither will any biographers. They will only know what people feed them, and everyone has their own agenda. How many of those biographers are trying to be the one that gets to be the official collaborator in the future? Tabloid writers know they’ll never have that chance, but someone who paints a public figure in a positive light for years has a better chance of being allowed in for “official” things in the future.
I haven’t read this latest offering from Penny Junor, so my comment is based sorely on what you’ve said here.
Don’t you find it suspect that in her biography of William, ignoring her usual Charles/Diana agenda, that she painted Kate as a ‘cold, dull, serious’ girl who put up with all sorts of shenanigans to land William? I thought she gave an overly negative impression of Kate compared to what is generally written about Kate in tabloids even when said tabloid writers are being negative about Kate.
In this version, she appears (based upon what you’ve written) to have written a different version of Kate. I’m sure people are allowed to change their minds, and of course tabloids are always looking for quick profitable readership, but I am genuinely curious that you didn’t notice this apparent change of heart on Penny Junor’s writing.
All of that said, I personally can’t stomach Penny Junor due to her very obvious agenda and bias, so good on you for taking one for the team so that you can report back.
•LAK•
Hello! 😊
I normally side eye Penny Junor as well. Her agenda against Diana is so old and exceedingly transparent (I’m just over it). However, her treatment of Charles is very head scratching as she cannot seem to produce anything but very backhanded compliments. I kept thinking Charles needs to get some new friends as his friends don’t help his case whatsoever. The thought, ‘With friends like that, who the h*ll needs enemies?!???’ was never far from my thoughts.
But, in William’s bio she took a different approach to Kate? *starts salivating and eying the knives* I’ll want to read that pronto. I do do ever love finding mistakes and this book certainly had it’s share! Lol
Mmmmmmm . Thanks for that ‘assignment’ LAK. I look forward to the dissection.
Have you read ‘Diana: Her Transformation’ by Stephen Twigg? That was VERY enlightening and I strongly recommend it. It doesn’t bash Charles either — always a bonus in my book.
I too always think of Kate as being a lazy girl, more interested in shopping than charity work; but this article gave me pause. Some of Germaine’s points raised seem plausible, and it does seem strange that a girl who worked so hard at school and to get into the palace wouldn’t seemingly work hard whilst in the palace. Maybe there is some truth to this… not all, but some?
The royal family, Harry excepted, is a bunch of boring, dull and uninteresting folk. Don’t really care for Kate, yes she might be a layabout, but I really do think that the Lessons of Diana shook them very much, and they will not have a more popular consort ever again. Kate really could be a people or media darling if she wanted to: pretty, slim, commoner, probably can hold a conversation like a normal person, and yet, here we are. Anachronism. Like, a woman must know her place. Maybe.
Kate was never going to be another Diana. Kate just doesn’t have the same personality. I’m not even talking about work ethic here. Harry basically has Diana’s personality; one that oozes charm, humor, sensibility, and care. And this is from someone who’s job is also not to overshadow; but, certain personalities will always shine. As far as her interest in art, as we all know, Kate date William for a long time. After graduation Kate never made any attempt to pursue these art interests. I don’t think she has as much passion for this as people think.
I just will never buy into the idea that Kate is somehow stilted in her role. There is FAR too much evidence to the contrary. And while it’s pre-marriage, it’s still a valid indicator of her personality. I know that everyone assumes living in “Diana’s shadow” is bad, but it’s working in Kate’s favor to a large degree. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard excuses for her lite schedule as not wanting to repeat another Diana debacle.
Here’s my 2 cents.
Kate as we know her is not Kate as she is. There’s too much spinning and filtering from the press. Kate shops daily, rarely works, and vacations often. That is simply what we know from actions to support information. The press comes out with all these tales that lack in proof or never happen. They create this homemaker image of a modern wife and mother. But it’s just an image. There’s no fact to support this full image.
I still feel if the press didn’t try to build the image of Kate up so much she would have been accepted more as she was before marriage. She wasn’t terribly respected and treated more as a tool to shame William, but still. It was understood she didn’t work or take interest with charities. All that backlash imo is straight from bad PR.
Kaye will never be Diana because she is intensely private. She will never be on a talk show baring her soul or give tearful press conferences about the need to withdraw from public life. She gives away so little, it’s almost impossible to have any real sense of her.
@FLORC – I have to agree with you on those points. A lot of my frustration with Kate is not directed towards her, but the press treatment of her image. They want to craft something that’s just not there.
@Megan – Intensely private… or just not that interesting??? I’m going the cynical route and saying that Kate gives away so little because there’s just not that much there. Certain people don’t need to speak to be interesting; pictures can convey personality as well. Another option is that Kate has been careful to guard and craft her image; so careful that it backfired (PR wise). If the public can’t get a sense of who you are, then they can’t relate. That has serious implications because you’re in danger of letting others craft your image.
Megan
I can’t agree. Diana transformed into that woman. She wasn’t pregnant with Harry (as Kate is pregnant with her 2nd) and calling up people for her sympathetic spin. And Kate could easily go this route if a divorce was pending or done. She’s already quite comfortable with paps and offering her side. In this way she’s steps ahead.
As is her family. Diana built that press foundation from scratch. The Middletons are well settled in from the years of Kate in the tabloids.
Kate wasn’t that private. Neither was her family. Is she private cause she’s only going to ad from her parents home to William? Because you don’t see her lunching with friends? Everything else we get via the Middleton approved outlets Tanna/Nichols. And we get a lot from them.
Does Kate have friends that she can lunch with? Does she have a life outside of the royal family and her family of origin? She is so protected and isolated, that she seems disconnected and detached. What is simply hers? Perhaps this is the feminist question. Where is a self apart from a tradition?
I dislike the assumption that she is not in control of her reproductive choices. I also think she wanted another baby. She and her siblings are close in age and William and Harry are close in age. I think that was the plan from the beginning- to have however many children they choose close together and then be done. I hate that some look at her as a breeding mare when she is just choosing to have a family with her husband. Plus one rough pregnancy doesn’t mean another. I doubt she expected to be so sick with the second as well.
You may dislike the assumption but it’s naive to think it doesn’t factor in at all. Pretending there isn’t a sexist tradition of the ‘heir and the spare’ in monarchy just because it’s really icky won’t make it disappear.
She had a choice not to marry into the institution, though. There was agency involved in that decision. Maybe her parents wanted her to marry into the royal family more than she did, but still the choice to not marry into the family and not reproduce like she was expected was available to her. William gave her a lot of time to think about it. She is fulfilling a traditional role undergirded by certain assumptions (some sexist, some personal) by having an heir and a spare, but that’s what happens when you marry into an institution like the royal family. That doesn’t mean the choice to refuse to go into that institution isn’t there.
I do think it’s possible that some of Kate’s personal desires do align with the traditional expectations of her role and that works out to the royal family’s convenience in the same way that a regular woman’s own personal choices may dovetail nicely with what is expected of her in whatever role she seeks out career-wise or personal-wise. We all make compromises. This is the compromise I believe Kate has chosen to take, and maybe for her the compromise is one that she likes or even aspires to.
@perplexed fair enough I can believe that her desires may conform to the traditional expectations of the monarchy. My problem is when people pretend those expectations don’t exist.
I think the one very true expectation of Kate is to produce an heir and a spare. That’s common sense since historical precedent demonstrates this goal. However, I think the rest the author can’t really prove — i.e that Kate isn’t allowed to decorate or isn’t allowed to indulge her interest in art. I don’t think she’s allowed to say anything publicly, but I don’t think the Queen is allowed to either. All of them are expected to be muzzled, unless they can convey their message(s) in the way Princess Diana and Prince Harry have done.
In general, however, I think there is an expectation of women to marry and reproduce (hence, all of the questions to single female celebrities as to why they haven’t married or had children yet) and none of us are attached to an institution like the royal family. In that sense, I think what Kate is facing may be somewhat universal to females. But Kate, like the rest of us, did have the choice not to marry and then be faced with the expectation of having children in a certain uniform way (two children to secure the lineage and passing of the crown). There may not exist any agency in going without children now that she’s firmly entrenched within the Royal Firm, but the steps preceding getting to that stage did allow her a choice or series of choices, just like the rest of us. I think she has negotiated what she wants for herself. Whether she’ll be happy in the long-run with what she’s negotiated, I have no idea. But we all face that dilemma when we look back on our lives.
Yes perplexed, thank you for your comment. You articulated the point I was trying to make beautifully. She had a choice in her marriage and “career” and it is not as if she did not anticipate having children as a part of that.
Well, it was actually her duty to have an heir. The concept isn’t easy to accept, but it’s true. She didn’t simply marry a man and chose to start a family with him. It had to be that way. Just as they had to wait until the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee was over.
Now once the heir and spare are there it’s totally up to her and William if baby #3 should happen. That will be their choice and not their duty.
I agree with all you said.
IMO after two rough pregnancy, I highly doubt she will get pregnant for a 3rd time.
Breeding, reproducing, expectations and demands… It’s a pleasure to pop out someone that you will find adorable for the rest of your life.
Luciana
1. Much of Kate is played up in the press. That’s my stance. She’s getting top notch care and no matter her health a cough would be treated as a cold. A headache as a migraine. It was always going to be this way.
2. She’s said she wants a 3rd. Or rather an article has sources saying she wants this. Past her spare she doesn’t have to have another child unless she wants to. William has said 2 is enough so we’ll see. The talk of 3 might have simply been a puff piece
Personal opinion on Kate is that she is infantilised by the ‘Pro Kate’ media. They want us to laud her for any and every small effort, like she is some naïf, instead of a grown woman who fought waity tooth and waity nail to get exactly where she is.
Yes!
+1
She had to have fought tooth and nail. I wonder what that was like…
+2
Really effective and informative but full of facts and figures.
Kate undoubtedly takes her cues from her husband, not from the rest of the royal family. She has always seemed to be subservient to him, and his general standoffishness with the media and lack of desire to get meaningfully involved in royal duties means neither can she. In a sense she’s shackled and if she truly wanted to take a higher profile with charity work, etc., she’d be in direct opposition to Prince Crankypants. So again and again, she gives in because I think she’s utterly in love with him and will do what he says to keep the peace. Obviously her family life is enormously important to her so I don’t think she’s seething with frustration at not being able to “work” at something other than making William a good wife and having babies.
totally agree with jaded.
Yea. When William wants something of Kate she has great drive and accomplishes it. If he wanted her to work she would. She uprooted her whole life for him. Losing friends, changing schools, tailored her life to his. She lives mostly for him. I say mostly because now there’s George and another on the way.
totally.
I had severe morning sickness with my daughter. That is the reason I have an only child. The puking and dry heaving and constant miserableness is something that is so horrible, I can’t imagine going through it twice in two years. Kate must have REALLY wanted another baby to go through it again! I just can’t imagine.
I’m actually finding it offensive that Germaine is trying to dictate Kate’s reproductive choices when she doesn’t know anything about Kate’s personal opinions on how many children she wants to have and how far apart she wants to space them. Of course The Firm wants her to reproduce, but it’s hardly like the royal family is one heir away from extinction (or passing on the throne to some obscure cousin from Hanover).
I have a friend who had much more severe HG than Kate does — to the point where she was bedridden throughout her pregnancies. She has three birth kids (she also adopted her nephew) simply because she wanted them and was willing to put up with the illness. Another woman with the same medical history might make a choice to limit herself to one pregnancy, and that’s fine too.
There is no right or wrong with any choice as long as it is made freely. And in Kate’s case, we have know way of knowing that she is being forced into it. Germaine Greer needs to stay silent unless she knows, with certainty, that this second pregnancy is NOT Kate’s personal choice.
•Malificent•
I agree. I think Greer is out to lunch. This quote is from Penny Junor’s Harry bio and while it pertains to William and Harry it certainly could be applied to any other British royal.
~”Both brothers always say,” says an aide, “They are never directed by their father or the Queen. People above them always give their advice but never directions. They are very keen for them to find their own way in life and make their own mistakes and find the things that they are good at themselves. There is no sense in which this is the only model and the one you have go follow and if you don’t do this, it’s wrong. They give them quite a bit of latitude.” A former aide concurs. “His father loves his sons to bits, and takes a paternal interest in everything they do, but he lets them lead their lives.”~
Excepted from ‘Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son’ by Penny Junor (US edition, 2014, pg. 267). There are lots of sources both named and unnamed in this book that comes from Harry’s office, his father’s, and grandmother’s.
It doesn’t seem like Greer has been paying attention.
1) Not allowed to decorate her own houses? Well first off they aren’t her houses they belong to the taxpayers and second, all she’s done in the last year is decorate to the tune of millions.
2) Not allowed to have an interest in art? One of her very few patronages is the National Art Gallery, which didn’t need the puny amount of attention KM has given it.
Greer seems to be saying that Middleton should be more than housewife, but all Middleton wants to be is a housewife. She had 10 years to do something else while waiting and chose to do nothing but wait. This is the life she wanted, palaces, shopping, vacations, laziness, and all. Much of this Newsweek article is people desperate to project something, anything interesting on Middleton and failing.
If Greer had written this about Masako it would have made sense, but taking this stance about Kate Middleton is odd. And why is Greer is focusing on things traditionally associated with “the little woman” (ie. decorating and a passing interest in art) instead of the much broader scope of what KM could/should be doing in her role?
I think that the lifestyle sounds pretty great… People seem to project all sort of things onto this girl who is merely enjoying her life. At least I hope that she is, as it is so over the top. I’ll bet that the Queen, and the rest of the family are fine with all of it. They all are rather insulated, because of their being part of an international brand, that just has to look like they deserve all the glory, due to blue blood. They do have to look royal, after all..
Notasugar
Just a tiny thing worth bearing in mind with Germaine Greer: she’s sometimes incorrect, and seems to be trying to keep up with her own zoom-around thoughts. Maybe there’s some tiny thing re décor that Kate was ‘encouraged’ to drop…..GG might have given this legs, and taken it as having no say at all.
(GG infuriates many of course, and maybe it’s a b/w thing: either you love her, warts and all, or you dislike her intensely.)
And the NPG:
this came up a few months ago and was booed, because people felt that in turning up at a black tie function there, Kate was not doing anything remotely useful to vizart…
.Dunno that I agree, funding being slashed everywhere, so a gallery known to have a royal patron might ‘encourager les autres’. Look at all the oligarchs, the nouveaux riches…..these people would pay a lot for a chance to meet Kate.
Hey ho anyway…..let’s hope she *will* do something in this field. ( I shall compile a LIST and send it to Buckingham Palace! By the swiftest-footed mailcoach.
Those same two points ran through my mind as I read Greer’s comments–Kate’s done a lot of decorating recently & she’s supporting the NPG (that’s as much ‘putting to work’ her degree that’s she’s done, at least publicly). I’m not quite sure what Greer’s going on about on those two points. As for the monarchical reproductive requirements–it would have been interesting had Kate & William not been able to have children, for whatever reason. Then what? Could they have adopted? What would that child’s position be? With modern reproductive methods & ethics, what if the couple had wanted to pursue surrogacy? Or IVF?
•Hazel•
Those are great questions with some easy answers. While they can adopt (any British Royal or aristocrat), the children would not be in line for the throne (or title), although they are still entitled to courtesy titles due to children of peers.
As of right now, children need to be ‘heirs of the body’ so surrogacy is out but IVF is a huge grey area. I think (I could be wrong) it’s still a no-no too.
I think it would be interesting to hear what Kate actually thinks or has to say – but the fact that she would never be allowed to speak candidly definitely supports Greer’s argument. If she’s totally on board with all of it, fine. If she’s not though – if she’s not being given her human agency – it would be an interesting conversation that could potentially encourage some kind of social change.
its not her job to speak candidly as much as CEOs need to watch what they say. she knew that when she got the job.
this really isnt about a woman or about a heterosexual marriage. its simply a job where you have to pop out some children so the show can go on and have a big smile at charity events.
All of that was known and isnt exclusive to her.
Come on, popping out children is not a job! There’s nothing so lovely as a mother and child, and will not loveliness be loved forever? (Euripides)
She is a tree of life to them…Proverbs 3:18 Bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh… Genesis 2:23
The little ones leaped, and shouted, and laughed And all the hills echoed… William Blake
Women can do that kind of magic!
wolfpup i think you dont understand me. i am talking about Kates position. she is not a woman with an office job. she is the wife of a possible future king. that means her job is to pop out babies to have an heir (and a spare). what else would a duchess do? the charity stuff is nice but its mainly to stay in the good graces with the public.
without babies no royal family! you cant compare that to other women and them being pregnant. same for William if he becomes the next King he wont rule England, his main job is to keep up the tradition, so his main job is to impregnate Kate. thats basically all royals do nowadys, representation, tourist attraction. gossip source and keep the family going by having kids.
William is also not free in his choice, he couldnt really wish for not having kids.
•Sara•
I honestly think that the BRF would be fine if William and Kate didn’t/couldn’t have children. The British Line of Sucession numbers in the thousands — unlike a great many other Imperial/Royal/Grand Ducal/Princely families. Disappointed? Yes but it’s not like it’s the end of the world either.
All that is passable is wealth and title (privilege). I do not respect the royals beyond this point. What does *king* mean other than that – wealth and privilege, power and patronage? In their own homes (palaces, whatever) they are a family, an unusual lifestyle, but I cannot see the seriousness of their breeding activity. So glad this is not the Middle Ages. The only difference between us is that they are rich. It just doesn’t seem right to me, to care so much about, whether or not somebody else has children.
•wolfpup•
You’d be surprised. A lot of Royals are *very* active and doing good things.
A bit off topic but I thought of a previous discussion we had loonnnngggg ago and thought I’d post it.
Enjoy! 😊
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/11123074/Bowing-and-curtsying-to-the-Queen-not-necessary.html
LS: Stressing the Queen’s humanity in that article was nice.
*Ladyslippers, other Queen fans (FLORC?)
(gawd knows where this will pop up, tis a long thread!)
Just bought Hello, bit late in the week, but you should see the absolutely awesome (and I never use that word outside its proper definition!) new photo portrait of HMQ, in the robes of the Order of the Thistle. The Monarch of the Glen.
Sorry to omit a link, I am trying and failing. If you have a mo, grab a copy!
Jeepers, she’s worth every farthing, just for pics like this.
Honestly though, Princess Charlene is the one we should be worried about. That marriage just seems…creepy.
This is true. Kate is beyond fine. She’s cared for and free to do as she pleases with much freedom from William.
Charlene on the other side has a passport likely under lock and key and always looks so defeated. Unless, she’s near water or away from her husband ofcourse.
Truth.
LOL at Charles not even ranking in the top 4.
I think that if the Royal family really had that much control over Kate, they would make her wear underpants..
Lmao.
True! You can’t argue that….
☺️
LOL thank u for one gigantic chuckle 🙂 🙂 🙂
HAHAHAHA
Great point
LOL…. great comment.
Hahahaha True.
In the Uk men wear underpants, not women.
I think Kate might be more educated some of the other royals (and even then, I think some of the younger royals and Charles match her in qualifications), but I’m unsure as to whether she’s actually smarter.
Sure Kate has her academic title. Nevertheless the polish is off that title. She hasn’t done anything with her academic merits for nearly a decade and they have faded. I doubt she really still “has it” as a history of art graduate.
Education has to include the development of oneself and what one is to do with life.
Kate is very much lacking there. In fact most Royals are more developed than her in that respect.
perplexed
Is she more educated? She only has 1 degree and it’s the Bachelors of Art History equiv to US degrees. Not there’s anything wrong with Art History! *looks for ArtHistorian*
Didn’t Eugenie pull a Double Major in? And if we’re only talking academic degrees and nothing more Harry’s skills aquired in his service will be out.
I wouldn’t say Kate is more educated or least educated. Just that there’s nothing that stands out and puts her in the top half of royals with academic achievements.
It was said Kate had difficulty learning. She had to have help and extra time. It didn’t come easily. That’s not shade.
Still, skills become dull with time and you can easily revert. Forgetting all learned kniwledge if it goes unused.
I wasn’t sure if she actually is more educated. It’s just that the media seems to make a big deal about her having a degree, as if it is some kind of rarity among royals. I know Charles has a university degree and so does William. The author of the original article claimed that she’s smarter than the other royals, and I wasn’t sure where that observation was coming from — sure, she’s probably smarter than Prince Philip but I think most of us are.
Eugenie
2:1 English Literature and History of Art BA Honours
Newcastle University
Beatrice
2:1 in History and History of Ideas
Goldsmiths
I think they talk up anything they can on Kate because they have so little to go on.
If she had a higher degree maybe.
That Kate doesn’t use her degree is the bothering part. Any that she only has 1 art related charity that is not struggling for funds or patrons is another.
FLORC,
Since this is about Kate’s academic merits in regard to her degree, I’ll weigh in with my professional opinion.
Kate only took an undergraduate degree in art history. This gives the student a basic foundation in the field. However, she didn’t pursue a graduate degree, which makes me suspect that she had no desire to pursue a caree in the field. There are not a plethory of job positions in the field, and employers generally look for people who have a graduate degree at the least. Chances are better if you have a ph.d. I think that is even more important in Britain because an English graduate degree is one 1 year (compared with the Danish equivalent, which is 2-3 years, depending on the program).
The english system is purely academic though some programs have provisions for internships. That means that British art history undergraduate generally has NO practical experience in the field. I did an MA alongside my two Danish degrees. And I had student jobs (6 jobs all in all) beside my studies, because work experience and networking is paramount in a relatively small field.
Many many young people take an undergraduate degree in Britain, but that is rarely enough if you’re serious about pursuing a career in your chosen field. One of my room mates in England did an undergraduate degree in Physics but got a job as a security guard in a shopping mall after university. For many young people doing an undergraduate degree is something you do because it is expected, all your friends do it, etc. In my own country, very few stop at an undergraduate degree because it isn’t worth much if you want to get a job in the field (the one exception that I know of is Meterology).
Another think about Kate and her art historical credentials. She hasn’t used her degree professionally at all, and it doesn’t look like she moved in in any kind of professional community after she left university. Like any other professional, an art historian like me need to keep abreast of new research, to keep one’s analytical skill set alive and well-honed and that is done not only by research but also by participated in seminars, lectures, etc. – because discussion is really the most challenging and inspiring thing for developing new ideas. I know from experience how being isolated from the academic community can whither your skill set and knowledge. I have been ill for a considerable amount of time, which really led me to feel less than competent. Just recently I’ve begaun to make my way into the professional community again, and I can’t completely explain how invigorating and inspiring it is to exchange ideas and research results with your collegues, whether they’re in academia or in museums, etc.
Since Kate only has an undergraduate degree, and has no work experience in the field, I doubt that she would have the skill-set and competence to start any larger art related enterprises on her own. Frankly, I doubt that she would even get the idea to something like that, because she has no experience. You really need to know how the field works, who to look to for help or inspiration, etc. Of course, if Kate had such an idea, she would have access to a lot of help, but if she wanted to be personally involved (not just as a figure head), she really would have to start from scratch.
I don’t know how strong her interest in art is. She might read up on certain artists or periods. However, she will not have the tools and knowledge for serious research, she has never been a part of the professional community and she has no work experience in the field.
ArtHistorian: You forget one very important point. Kate is royalty now. That means she only has to snap her fingers and every experienced and or appropriate professional will dance to her tune and will help her put together any project.
A regular person like you would have to keep up per your excellent post, but royalty cuts through all of that and frankly that’s why i am frustrated at the waste of Kate’s platform.
She can call up the head of any institution or body world wide, have vague ideas of what she’s like, and the professionals would pull the vision together for her. She doesn’t have to have a strong interest or even a good/populist interest in the subject.
In all my research about the royals, that point has been made repeatedly. one has unlimited access no matter their own talent or intellect or interest and people will jump if a royal comes calling no matter how vague and or ill thought out the royal’s desires/ideas turn out to be.
LAK
I know that she would have access to very competent and experienced people. But she would also have to do some work herself (just like Harry did with the Invictus Games). My point was that it might be difficult to have the awareness of what what kind of initiative might be needful and/or most effective when she has no experience with the field. Even vague ideas need to be given shape, and that needs work – and her hypothetical advisers would need to know what precisely that vision would be.
Maybe I’m just spoiled by royals who actually do research subjects pertinent to their patronages, or delving whole-heartedly into any “non-royal” projects, like QMII and her costume design for the Royal Ballet. I would be great if Kate would exert her academic credentials into something more than being a patron that occasionally turns up at a gala function at the National Portrait Gallery.
However, I must admit that I have my doubts about how strong her interest in art history is. She might have taken a degree but she has never showed much interest in the field (especially before her marriage). Furthermore, She might just have taken an udergraduate degree like so many other young people in Britain to get the “university experience”, and not as a career path.
I honestly don’t understand her. If she was that passionate about art and its history, then why did she spend the better part of a decade in voluntary idleness? Maybe it is just a matter of professional pride for me, but having spent some time in enforced idleness by circumstances beyond my control, I can’t for the life of me see the appeal of that kind of life no matter how financially secure it is. It simply produces an enthropy of the mind.
I really don’t expect to see any serious initiative from her (on any subject/cause) for at least a couple of decades. I may be cynical, but she doesn’t really appear to have any interests outside family life (besides shopping and vacationing). I think that becoming Prince and Princess of Wales will be a rude awakening for both her and her husband.
•ArtHistorian•
England and Scotland are different in their degree requirements which is why I’ve also looked at Scottish universities (and recommended them to my children or their friends) because they require a more in-depth knowledge base that’s similar to the US. Still, even here in the US most fine art degrees need some kind of terminal degree (e.g. MFA or PhD) to get a job. Fine art degrees done at an undergraduate level are mostly to build a foundation for further studies or for pleasure.
And totally what LAK said. The vast majority of Royals have access to resources that is hard to even fathom.
•ArtHistorian•
I forgot to say hello before! *waves* I adore these conversations!
In all fairness, there are numerous British Royals (Charles, Anne, Sophie, Brigitte, Richard, Michael, Marie-Christine, Alexandra, etc.) that role up their sleeves to get knowledgable about various interests. I think it’s more to do with personality than anything.
Also, William is determined to do things differently (as his Harry). I think he thinks that it’s totally okay to serve Queen and country in other manners than traditional royal duties like ribbon cutting. And he thinks a great service to the country is also by building a solid marriage and family. I think that’s why we see them both trying to create a strong family foundation vs traditional royal duties. Only time will tell if William is on pointe or off his rocker. BUT after the very public breakdown of: his parents’ marriage, the Yorks’ marriage, and the Princess Royal’s marriage and the damage all that did to the monarchy it kinda makes sense.
As for Kate, while I understand that being William’s girlfriend would greatly increase the difficulty in working, I’m not crazy about her solution. Those decisions affect her today and not for the better. At least IMHO.
roll* not role
Grrrrr I hate it when I put the wrong word in. Sorry as I’m also not able to go in and correct my errors (I always try to if I catch them).
Hi LadySlippers *waves*
It is nice to see you again. I have withdrawn somewhat from this site, but I do read the threads now and again, and this was a topic that I can speak on with authority.
I recently watched a documentary on Faberge and Prince Michael of Kent participated and shared his knowledge on Faberge. He seems to be a very charming and interesting man. He, his wife and Charles are the only members of the BRF that I would actually like to meet.
I really don’t think that it would have been difficult for Kate to work as a royal girlfriend. There are plenty of examples of royal girl- and boyfriends working, even those that didn’t make it to the altar. I think the issue has more to do with the social set that Kate and her siblings belong to (or want to belong to). As a far as I know Pippa doesn’t really work either, and Harry’s girldfriend Cressida also seems to be unemployed. And you’re right that her decision no to work for the better part of a decade doesn’t reflect well on her. I’m sure she’s a lovely person but I must admit that I find it hard to understand (and to a certain extent, respect) a person who just floats idly through life without purpose or passion.
I’m talking about her pre-marriage days here. She’s a new mother and I’m sure she has her hands full with a toddler and one on the way. I don’t doubt that she’s a devoted mother but she married into an institution that comes with duties and responsibilites. She has earned herself a reputation as work-shy, if not downright lazy, and that is going to be hard to overturn unless she applies herself, and we haven’t seen any indications of that yet. She might put in more of an effort when her children are older, but I won’t hold my breath until then.
Arthistorian: You are spoilt by royals that actually do some research and develop proper knowledge of their chosen field and subject.
British royals are the opposite of that. It’s not the norm for them to be as involved to the extent that Harry is involved with any of his projects. Some of them are genuinely knowledgeable and passionate about their chosen subject, but as a collective, not so much.
It’s actually embarrassing how many intelligent people drop everything to work on a project commissioned by a royal or even take that meeting with the royal based upon vague notion of what the royal would like.
The royal’s office is usually filled with the people who translate royal’s vague and vaguely outlined desires into reality such that the royal appears to be very involved and knowledgeable. It’s cheating since the royal receives all the credit, but it happens all the time.
As for Kate, I stand by my assessment of her. She didn’t work before marriage and she won’t work afterwards. I don’t think she’ll work. Ever. I often go back to her often repeated remark that she’s taken care of. That seems to be the extent of her self-stated desires. Since she’s a throwback, my interpretation of that remark is throwback ie to the era where women had babies and we’re taken care of and coddled and that was the extent of their contribution to the world.
•LAK•
I think part of the BRF issue is that they went for quantity rather than quality which makes a lot look flighty and uneducated. And then of course, there are those that are exactly that (*cough*Andrew*cough*).
I kinda held out an opinion on Kate but I’m leaning towards your view and the only work we’ll see from her is devoted mother.
•ArtHistorian•
Apparently, the press did make it very difficult for Kate to work. Couple that with her reported desire to work around William’s schedule and that made it challenging to hold a job. Such a shame too. Even part-time work would have been better than nothing.
And I agree, it’s one thing to work your tuchas off before marriage and and after marriage and then take time off when needed. That worked for Sophie and she also needed to take time off for her children and no one thinks she’s lazy whereas Kate left that thought linger with no other evidence to contradict it. My guess is that will hang around and slowly start eroding her, and thus the monarchy’s, popularity.
“Apparently, the press did make it very difficult for Kate to work. Couple that with her reported desire to work around William’s schedule and that made it challenging to hold a job. ” She was the one who would re-do her makeup and deliberately exit out the front door of clubs into the sea of paps, when the owners offered to sneak her out the back. The Middleton family’s relationship with the press and paps is as complex as the one Diana had.
She could have easily worked regardless of the press. Her parents were supporting her, she never had to earn a dime or lift a finger. She could have started a business and they would have paid someone else to do the things she couldn’t handle (accounting, pr, whatever). “Run” an arts charity for kids, had an eco-friendly kids clothing line, had her own jewelry company and donate the proceeds to charity, anything.
With someone else doing the heavy lifting (accounting, tracking manufacturing, fulfilling orders), all she had to do was sketch a few designs and call herself a business woman. All of that could have been done working around William’s schedule, since the majority of the work would have been done by others. The press didn’t stand in the way of her doing that; she chose not to work.
•nosugarhere•
I said the press made it difficult to work and they did. Howeve I agree, difficult or challenging does not equal impossible. She could have done a multitude of things or
even follow in both Chelsy and Cressida’s examples and just sucked up the horrible press presence and still went to work. (I don’t see her starting her own business regardless of who does/did the heavy lifting. Heck, Camilla became very involved with a few charities prior to marriage precisely FOR the good press)
Kate’s (as does everyone’s) decisions will continue to haunt her and unfortunately they end up casting shadows on today’s actions.
I won’t deny that the press was a nuisance. However, I do believe that her desire to follow William’s schedule (and his whims) made it difficult for her to hold on to any real job, since not many employers would tolerate an employee taking off on a moment’s notice to satisfy her boyfriends whims and wants. It seems to me that she put William’s priorities above her own ambitions (if she had any) and I just find that very sad.
Kate’s intelligence seems like one of those manufactured fictions out there, along with her secret charity work and passion for cooking. Maybe these things are true, maybe not. As someone said upthread, we really don’t know anything about this woman other than the PR. She does seem wise enough to live by that old adage… remaining mute and being suspected a fool, rather than speaking and removing all doubt.
Prince William risks to become a laughing stock if Kate really is in charge of him or if people start believing that.
Apart from that I salute Mrs. Greer on her views and I hope that both the British monarchy and the British aristocracy will be abolished soon and hopefully in a somewhat peaceful manner.
I wonder if that is even possible as Her Majesty is head of state, her likeness is on all the coins, and she is head of the Church of England. It seems as though the government needs a queen, so the House of Lords can exist (all those titles) – but to be sure I am not very familiar with the workings of the British government…just wondering.
The British press and PR must be livid, because after a decade of nonstop pummeling the public over the head with stories of Kate the Great, the public decides she’s NOT.
I never got what the hype was about with her during the dating years , she was not even charismatic in her party girl,clubbing days with William, but I hoped, well …maybe after marriage she’d show what her interest are with charity work she chooses, but she’s been so lackluster, such a non-starter.
If Kate showed some initiative it would help, but I doubt William would want that. I believe part of the reason he chose her is because she is lackluster and won’t ever push to do more in the way of royal work. I believe if Kate truly wanted to work more, she would not be stopped, the Palace would make a way for her to do so. The Countess of Wessex was to be her example, the Queen was said to have asked Kate to shadow Sophie, the Countess of Wessex ,during the time of the engagement, privately speak w Sophie about transitioning into royal duties, but Kate was said to have scoffed at the suggestion to William. William was said to not see any reason for Kate needing Sophie’s coaching, that HE would advise her. The thing is Sophie would have been a good person for her to watch , because even though Sophie does not get press recognition, she gets accolades from her charities and for her royal work. The Queen adores Sophie and a big part of that is because Sophie works hard.
Sadly William seems the sort who prefers to hide away and Kate aides him in that mission to a degree. He doesn’t seem to show that he cares much for royal duty.
As far as Kate loving William, I believe she has always loved what William represents and that was her main reason for being Waity Katey, the title, riches and life of leisure as she perceived Royal life to be.
Good to see Harry finally getting some kudos. He definitely seems to have initiative as shown with the Invictus games. Harry definitely has much more of his mother charisma and that’s something that can’t be taught.
Kate reminds me of the story, the emperors new clothes, where the press keeps telling us she’s hardworking, charismatic, etc, for years, until finally someone in the public shouts She’s NONE of those things and finally others admit she never was.
The British royal-press for the most part won’t admit, they backed a lame horse ( no offense meant to horses or Kate) it’s just an expression.
Go Harry!
Remember when William had men sent to that DM journalist? She wrote about how Kate wasn’t all the press was claiming her to be. Then the journalist wrote about how William’s men paid her a visit claiming Kate did work hard and she should write about how hard Kate works. The journalist was not having it! It’s a great snarky piece.
Kate is who she is. She has her life and there’s no outside reason to change. Even if there was a type of revolution it wouldn’t hinder her lifestyle.
With all the “Kate” complaints I read here there’s 1 common link. The press. Stop pushing this false image like we have no other sources for news.
Best source for fun snark is a handful of royal reporters on twitter. They’re hilarious towards the news and eachother.
Yes. That was so insane. He had his handlers corner a Journalist for things she wrote about Kate! I was shocked, but was quite happy the journalist told about the incident and didn’t keep his tantrum quiet. Very revealing about William and Kate. IMO
Charlotte
+1.
Stolemyname
++1
…Waity on girlfriend watch to PW is totally different from a royal wife where much is expected in the role. More so when we have similar royals (I.e. By marriage), who are dutiful and hardworking as QM QL CP M, and mums..
This is a good point for me. “Doing royal work is expected, and all similar royals (by marriage) are dutiful and hardworking”. There are no excuses.
Whoa! – Will accosted a journalist? It sounds like these people are kind of desperate! They should just work! Even William’s, special set up by his dad “job” makes me lose a little bit of respect for him. He could always play with helicopters on the weekend. I wonder if this is some kind of need to prove his maleness.
I’ve had a bit of scorn for men for that, but what do women do to lock down a sense of self? In my opinion, the biology and the responsibility of reproduction belong to both parents. And both parents are entitled to become separate and whole individuals. I am a content and satisfied mother, but I spent a lot a time before and after in universities satisfying my personal curiosities. I hope that Kate will develop confidence to pursue a vision, aside from her family life.
Greer’s article is full of misinformation about Kate. It seems like GG knows nothing about Kate & had never read any of Kate’s PR. It sounds like GG just picked a famous name to make a victim-idol out of. In the future, GG should stick with people she knows something about.
This feminist has never heard of the word ‘infantilizing’ apparently.
Greer has no business telling women how to mind their own business! Feminist theory is meant to increase choices – not to dictate them, thru an individual’s feminist lens. Is Kate really a prisoner? I highly doubt it. IMO
•wolfpup•
I agree. This is the type of feminism that paints feminism, as a whole, very negatively. Greer comes across as angry and uninformed and, IMO, does a lot of damage in an of itself to women.
Kate is not a prisoner. She seems happy and content. Whether anyone agrees with her choices in life is another matter entirely.
With all due respect, this is a simplistic view of Greer, just like hers is simplistic regarding Kate.
•hmmm•
How so? Greer’s arguement is not a sound one nor does it (IMHO) enhance women’s rights. BUT a *great* many people will attribute Greer’s statement to all feminists as a whole. Sound bits, especially angry ones, trump all else and make money (clicks on a website or papers — makes no difference how). It matters not how truthful or ‘heavy’ the subject matter is. That’s the danger as I see it.
When you wonder why many women don’t want to carry the feminist banner, you need look no further than women like Greer. The hatred of men and the minimizing of choices they don’t agree with leaves a bad taste in a lot of women’s mouths. Obviously feminism is more than this, but the extremes always get the attention and it turns a lot of people off.
I agree with you. Some ladies(?) take the feminine out of feminism.
Again, with due respect, what a simplistic and stereotypical view of feminist as manhater. In this case, someone who, in her time, was a radical and revolutionary thinker and helped lead a lot of us women out of the dark ages. Guaranteed, she does not hate men, but I can bet she doesn’t see the need of them at her age.
•hmmm•
But one main problem that feminists encounter quite often IS the perception we all hate men. Even though the truth is very different but that doesn’t change the perception though.
It’s the perception that’s key and does indeed confuse the populace as to what a feminist is. Unfortunately, extremists really muddy any water they are in. 😢
Greer might very well been a formidable women in her day but stuff like this really isn’t helpful and tends to hurt feminism more than help it.
hmmm: this quote from Germaine Greer that perhaps is more representative of her thought than above:
The surest guide to the correctness of the path that women take is joy in the struggle. Revolution is the festival of the oppressed. For a long time there may be no perceptible reward for women other than their new sense of purpose and integrity. Joy does not mean riotous glee, but it does mean the purposive employment of energy in a self-chosen enterprise. It does mean pride and confidence. It does mean communication and cooperation with others based on delight in their company and your own. To be emancipated from helplessness and need and walk freely upon the earth that is your birthright. To refuse hobbles and deformity and take possession of your body and glory in its power, accepting its own laws of loveliness. To have something to desire, something to make, something to achieve, and at last something genuine to give. To be freed from guilt and shame and the tireless self-discipline of women. To stop pretending and dissembling, cajoling and manipulating, and begin to control and sympathize. To claim the masculine virtues of magnanimity and generosity and courage. What will you do? [Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch]
“If we are angry it is because we have seen the attack. If we are noisy, it is because women are suffering. If we sound strident, it is because the affirmation of women grates on the ears of the masculists (those who idealize men). “It is not that we are so radical,” said Gloria Steinem, “but that there is something radically wrong with our world.”
Wolfpup
Slim chance you’ll pop back, but…
That excerpt brought tears to my eyes. Reading The Female Eunuch in 1971, as I did, was to undergo a vastly revelatory experience. Reading that piece today, it may seem obvious or even prdestrian, so much having changed for the better. But over 40 yrs ago, it was dynamite, unignorable. Such passion!
Chris2: it sounds like we are about the same age. Women are a potent force when called to action, aren’t we? Glory Be!
Um sorry what? This article is dumb. Everyone in the RF has to do the same things as Kate. And to say she’s smarter than everyone in the family cos she got an A? FFS
Upstream comment of Waity ‘marry. into the.RF more for the middleton family’… onsidering more time and security cost for Waity staying in buckleberry than creating her own home and family.
Or waity have understanding of how to lead a staff and managing palaces (except spending on renovations) ; and find royal duties overwhelming to a workshy Waity.
A great analysis of the survey.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/26/newsweek-s-nonsense-who-d-be-kate-survey.html
William and Kate’s PR trying to do damage control. Too LATE!
Newsweek article hit the internet and went around the worlds press in some form or another, the cats out the the bag, she’s just not admired or even very respected on a certain level by the general public.
The article revealed that a portion of The public does not hold her in great esteem or admiration.
Newsweek is a quite respected magazine.
Tom Sykes in no mouthpiece for the BRF — he often criticises them.
This is a much better analysis as the Newsweek article left me scratching my head as to it’s conclusions.
The thing about many of the Kate sugars is they ONLY want to give credibility to the sugary articles, positive articles ,but as soon as a article arises showing Kate in a negative light ,they want the world to discount it. Well guess what, the world read. Newsweek and it’s a credible , respected magazine and no matter what some try to come up,with To discount the Newsweek findings backed up by poll numbers, it’s too little too late! Damage done.
It does not matter how much Tom Sykes or any other alleged sudden mouthpiece trying to put the Newsweek article down, the DAMAGE has been done and home truths have emerged, Kate is just not connecting positively to the public and the public even after years of constant sugary hard promotion by the British press,they have NOT convinced the public that Kate is an asset to the Monarchy , nor is she admired.
Tom Sykes has certain people he takes shots at regularly in the RF, the few time s he has criticized Kate it was for her rear ass bearing non weighted skirts and that took him forever to mention it, whereas he goes some others regularly.
Newsweek opened the truth up to how the public does not hold Kate in great esteem. The Emperor(…Duchess) has no clothes and finally a credible periodical or magazine is saying it!
•Someonestolemyname•
You are both right AND wrong.
What Tim Sykes correctly did was to challenge the methodology of this questionnaire. No matter how reputable the source, methodology should always be thoroughly scrutinised and this was sorely lacking. The reason being is you can create a study and have it say what YOU, the interviewer, want. Methodology is crucial to having a truly unbiased and scientifically sound study. Here, the questions were very misleading and had a number of interpretations; and the ones chosen by Newsweek were the most inflammatory and oddly concluded. (Now is when I wish Snarkweek was here to reinforce this as we’ve had this discussion on CB before)
Unfortunately, most people (including a lot of journalists) aren’t aware of how crucial it is to look at methodology in ANY study in order to determine validity and this study as Tom Sykes pointed out, is lacking.
While you are correct that people won’t see it as that — however, it’s really not damaging in the great scheme of things.
No one knows what Kate’s image will be even five years from now.
It’s sometimes the slow chipping away of an image which does the most damage.
Sorry Daily Beast but I for one would like to be queen, and for more than just one day. Why? Because I would do so much more than cut ribbons, restore my castles and put my stamp on posh soaps! There is no reason why the BRF must be so bland and un opinionated other than longstanding custom and a desperation not to offend or call attention to themselves, which is what ends up making their role as public figures so useless. When the most popular defence of your role is “tourist attraction” you’re no more effective than Mickey Mouse.
“Mickey Mouse”…that’s funny!
I am genuinely shocked that Kate would rank so high on a survey of ‘favourite members’ of the BRF.
If someone doesn’t want the pressure of reproducing, the future King of England probably isn’t the best choice of spouse then.
Although Diana had troubles in her marriage, I doubt she ever regretted having her heir and her spare. The only way I could see someone having that sort of regret is if the person never ever wanted to have children in the first place or the children grew up to be murdering criminals.
Maybe Kate knew her second bout of morning sickness was going to be dreadful, and decided she wanted to get the prospect over with rather than waiting to endure it.
I wonder if Germain has lost it. Ever since she said the first Australian female prime minister had a fat ass. Sexist.
Yep, was about to say the same thing. Criticising Australia’s first female minister on her body shape and publicly ridiculing her dress sense (among a table of hooting men) for the delight of the media… Greer’s feminist credentials have slipped quite a bit. As someone said, she is just a publicity-seeking troll at this point (Celebrity Big Brother, anyone?)
The Newsweek articles poll numbers must have caused a sh!te storm in the Palace, because as if by magic, suddenly Kate only has morning sickness now and is feeling well enough to start up Royal duties again, according to the Daily Mail.
Word.
Honestly, I don’t think they cared about the survey at all.
My issue is that if Kate is better in 3 weeks, how is that really HG? Most women are miserable for a lot longer than a mere 3 weeks… (I was). Not that I’d wish ANY severe morning sickness of anyone for ANY length of time but once again it puts her diagnosis as questionable •Florc• alluded to it up thread).
Probably not the survey. Most likely it’s vacation time for the Middletons or she just dodged the Malta trip. I don’t for a minute she ever had HG now or the first time.
You know, I really, really love this site. It’s the first one I click on first thing in the morning. But I have to say my peace here: Enough with the bashing of Kate and for the love of God, ENOUGH of the “waity” snark. None of us has any insight into what kind of person she is and all we’re doing is nothing but pure, unsubstantiated gossip. I dated a guy I was madly in love with for 7 years, hoping he would want to marry me (he didn’t in the end). Does that make me “waity” too? I’m all for gossip, but only when it’s someone who truly deserves it (Lindsay, Kim K., Paris, Leanne Rimes, etc). I honestly don’t know what Kate has done to deserve such ire for so many of you. Many of your chief complaints is that she’s “lazy”. Jesus people, cut her some slack. She barely got married ten minutes ago and almost immediately had a baby, and now she’s pregnant again. Princess Diana was practically canonized as a saint and she barely lifted a finger until after her divorce. I honestly haven’t seen or heard Kate do anything that is deserving of so much hatred. Call it one woman’s opinion and I know you all are entitled to your own as well, but I just really think people should cut her a little slack. And as for the notion that she knew exactly what she was walking into, puleeze! She might have had a slight notion but I highly doubt she had any idea as a commoner how rigid her life as a royal was going to be. And as for people loving Harry and hating William and thinking he’s stuffy and stodgy, well of course he is! He’s the future king of England and has that burden constantly on his shoulders. I adore Harry too, but he can afford to lay back and have a little fun. There’s not a whole lot expected of him, at least not with respect to what Will has ahead of him. Just something to consider:)
This is a gossip site. If you are not interested in gossip, you’re in the wrong place. I’d suggest that you read through threads for the past few years. There are intelligent, well-spoken writers on here who have addressed and discussed many of the issues you raise. You may not agree with people who criticize Kate Middleton, but they are allowed to criticize her and most (not all) do so logically and politely.
Many compare her to royal spouses from other countries, and when you look at the numbers, caliber of self-presentation and awareness, and commitment to duty — Middleton comes out looking pretty bad. Same holds true for William. When stacked against other royals of his age he is undereducated, inexperienced, and workshy (forget the heir-to-heir argument, HM and Charles could be gone tomorrow). W&K are not meant to be shallow celebrities, they have a taxpayer-funded role in this world that they refuse to do.
BTW, enough with the revisionist history and bashing of Diana. She did over 200 engagements the first year of marriage, at age 20, while pregnant. Whatever else came later, her work ethic was solid from the start.