Author Topic: General Chat: William & Kate (Read 11771 times)

Hale · « **Reply #150 on:** February 15, 2012, 04:53:15 PM »

I myself am very much hoping that Kate is carefully introduced slowly into Royal duties. Also, it is worth noting, that PW just like his late mother visits his charities out of the public sights as he feels this is a way of connecting with people whom his charities help. I should like to think Kate is also doing this. We know that PW does this because of the Monarchy at Work series. Also, this is something that Harry does as well.

So.....yes indeed kudos to Kate for her public events so far (Paps on Twitter are describing her Liverpool visit as Mania), but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Kate is doing things quietly behind the scenes.

sandy · « **Reply #151 on:** February 15, 2012, 05:15:13 PM »

William's mother was seen on a regular basis. I think it would be good for neophyte Kate to be seen regularly and publicly doing royal duties and not having speculation about what she does behind the scenes. I think the public want to get to know her and if it is mostly behind the scenes many won't see her in action--it is also IMO good for her.

Lothwen · « **Reply #152 on:** February 15, 2012, 05:17:59 PM »

I have to agree with Sandy. After all, the Queen does a lot more public engagements and I'm sure she's a higher target than Kate is. And frankly, I've grown sick of the "What does Kate do? Oh she did ______ in private! See, she's working." stories that we've gotten ever since Kate graduated from St. Andrews.

cinrit · « **Reply #153 on:** February 15, 2012, 05:32:25 PM »

We don't see everything the Queen does, either. Two days ago, I posted the number of engagements the Queen undertook last year. If I remember correctly, she undertook 325 in the U.K. (380 total, including Australia, I would suppose). But we didn't see her at every one of them. As a matter of fact, we saw only a small fraction of them. The same can be said of every member of the Royal Family. But we do believe they're working.

As for Diana, I don't remember seeing her daily or even all that often in her first year or two in the Royal Family.

Cindy

Hale · « **Reply #154 on:** February 15, 2012, 07:24:13 PM »

Exactly Cinrit. The press doesn't give ALL that much coverage to the Queen as they should do so much for gratitude.

Quote from: sandy on February 15, 2012, 05:15:13 PM

William's mother was seen on a regular basis. I think it would be good for neophyte Kate to be seen regularly and publicly doing royal duties and not having speculation about what she does behind the scenes. I think the public want to get to know her and if it is mostly behind the scenes many won't see her in action--it is also IMO good for her.

What is the suggestion here? Have we learnt nothing? I do not want ANY member of the RF to go through what Diana went through. As for the public wanting to get to know her.......well she is Kat is not the next Queen, she's behind Camilla in that pecking order. Both W&K have their future ahead of them there is plenty of time to get to know her. It strikes me Kate is dam*** if she does and dam*** if she doesn't. I for one would not wish to condemn any wife who marries into the RF the way both Diana and Fergie was treated. I am very, very happy with the way things are being handled. Slowly and surely. That's the way it should be. It shows the RF have learnt from the past.

Now if only the Kate detractors could get on board that would be great.

sophiechloe · « **Reply #155 on:** February 15, 2012, 07:47:19 PM »

Quote from: Hale on February 15, 2012, 07:24:13 PM

Now if only the Kate detractors could get on board that would be great.

I'm sure some will in time.

sandy · « **Reply #156 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:19:24 PM »

Quote from: Hale on February 15, 2012, 07:24:13 PM

Exactly Cinrit. The press doesn't give ALL that much coverage to the Queen as they should do so much for gratitude.

Quote from: sandy on February 15, 2012, 05:15:13 PM
William's mother was seen on a regular basis. I think it would be good for neophyte Kate to be seen regularly and publicly doing royal duties and not having speculation about what she does behind the scenes. I think the public want to get to know her and if it is mostly behind the scenes many won't see her in action--it is also IMO good for her.

What is the suggestion here? Have we learnt nothing? I do not want ANY member of the RF to go through what Diana went through. As for the public wanting to get to know her.......well she is Kat is not the next Queen, she's behind Camilla in that pecking order. Both W&K have their future ahead of them there is plenty of time to get to know her. It strikes me Kate is dam*** if she does and dam*** if she doesn't. I for one would not wish to condemn any wife who marries into the RF the way both Diana and Fergie was treated. I am very, very happy with the way things are being handled. Slowly and surely. That's the way it should be. It shows the RF have learnt from the past.

Now if only the Kate detractors could get on board that would be great.

Diana's issues IMO were primarily from the marriage. I think Fergie had other problems that could not be helped by giving her more "behind the scenes work." Diana did well with royal duties albeit was just literally started as a royal "overnight". Fergie appeared rather awkward and gauche at some of her appearances, As I said there is such a thing as being overcautious too. I think Kate is a mature, educated, and poised young woman and I don't think it should take months or years to see her on a schedule of doing public appearances and working on her charities. I think behind the scenes is fine but she is still a future Queen Consort and a Princess of Wales and married to one of the most famous people on the planet, so I do think the public would like to see her and get to know her. I don't think Kate's work should be mostly behind the scenes where "someone" says Kate did this or Kate did that. I think she needs to be out there. It's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Also the image of Kate should be steered so her press would not be limited to her outfits or her hair. I'm not a detractor to want to see more substance to her since she is a future Queen Consort.

Lothwen · « **Reply #157 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:21:10 PM »

I agree Sandy. I think it does Kate a disservice to pace her the way that they have. Look how well she did on Valentine's Day. I actually think she does better when William isn't around.

sandy · « **Reply #158 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:28:39 PM »

Quote from: cinrit on February 15, 2012, 05:32:25 PM

We don't see everything the Queen does, either. Two days ago, I posted the number of engagements the Queen undertook last year. If I remember correctly, she undertook 325 in the U.K. (380 total, including Australia, I would suppose). But we didn't see her at every one of them. As a matter of fact, we saw only a small fraction of them. The same can be said of every member of the Royal Family. But we do believe they're working.

As for Diana, I don't remember seeing her daily or even all that often in her first year or two in the Royal Family.

Cindy

I don't think Kate and the Queen can be compared. Kate married into the Firm. The Queen is the monarch and has been for 60 years. I don't recall any stories about the Queen being "said" to be seen this place or that place--she was seen. And there is no doubt that the Queen works--Kate doesn't have the behind the scene duties the Queen has and it is well documented that the Queen has met and meets with PMs. Also the Queen's appearances and work are not limited to how her hair looks or what she wears or did her coat sell out in a store. It also should be remembered that the Queen is 85 and still keeps an active schedule.

Diana was pregnant in her first year of marriage. I read that she was supposed to go on a royal tour with Charles. She had morning sickness in her first appearance in Wales and soldiered on. There was not a sense of Diana not being "out there." It is well documented that she was launched into royal duties right away. It was "sink or swim" as she said.

I do think that some sort of a medium can be reached between where Kate isn't treated like a delicate tea cup who needs a huge amount or training over a long period and where she is launched into royal duties with no preparation. I think there is such a thing as being overcautious. The best trainng I think would be behind the scenes education and on the job training.

cinrit · « **Reply #159 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:54:00 PM »

^^ Sandy, I said that the same applies to every member of the Royal Family. That would include Sophie, Camilla, Prince Philip, Mark Phillips, and anyone who is married into the family rather than being born into it:

Quote from: cinrit on February 15, 2012, 05:32:25 PM

The same can be said of every member of the Royal Family.

I don't see why Kate should be held to different standards than they.

Cindy

sophiechloe · « **Reply #160 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:58:59 PM »

Quote from: cinrit on February 16, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

I don't see why Kate should be held to different standards than they.

Maybe because Kate has a "workshy" image to dispell. The others (rightly or wrongly) do not.

nymphette · « **Reply #161 on:** February 17, 2012, 11:55:38 AM »

Differing opinions about whether she is work shy or not, what is true is the different role the royal family may think they need to project now.

DrReSi · « **Reply #162 on:** February 18, 2012, 07:17:36 PM »

Quote from: sandy on February 16, 2012, 06:28:39 PM

Diana was pregnant in her first year of marriage. I read that she was supposed to go on a royal tour with Charles. She had morning sickness in her first appearance in Wales and soldiered on. There was not a sense of Diana not being "out there." It is well documented that she was launched into royal duties right away. It was "sink or swim" as she said.

Catherine had undertaken her pre-wedding royal duties with tours to Northwestern England, St. Andrews in Scotland, Belfast N Ire, and of course in North Wales. (I don't know what royal duties Diana did before her wedding aside from the Royal Opera benefit event). Within 2 months after the wedding, she & Prince Williams had already embarked on an overseas tour to Canada and the US. Diana's 1st overseas visit occurred 2 years after she married Prince Charles. Catherine has now started her solo engagements with visits to her chosen charities, well before her 1st yr wedding anniversary. Diana's first solo was months after William was born in 1982.

In the early stages of royal life, Diana was "out there" but Catherine is not???

Hale · « **Reply #163 on:** February 19, 2012, 08:02:35 PM »

I don't believe Kate does have a workshy image to dispel. I think it is all dependent on how you think and what people write about her.

I am aware one writer, Janet Street Porter is highly critical of Kate. Now I am an admirer of JSP and I do understand where she is coming from. JSP came from humble beginnings and made a name for herself in the media field especially in those areas which were at the domination of men at a time it was thought they would always be. JSP is a feminist. Where I do disagree with JSP and a number of people on the forum is that it appears today that women are expected to have careers and if they choose otherwise then they are held in scorn. I used to think feminism was about choice, but I question that now.

If Kate had swam the channel or worked at a call center for 8hrs a day and little pay it would be irrelevant to the life she has now married into. As I've said time and time before, Fergie had a full time career prior to marrying into the RF. It didn't make her a better person for it and in fact if memory serves me well it was Fergie who was constantly and rightly accused of holidaying and shopping continuously by the press.

Wilkat · « **Reply #164 on:** February 20, 2012, 08:19:38 PM »

Just wanted to mention that Clarence House said she has done some behind the scenes work with charities.

wannable · « **Reply #165 on:** February 23, 2012, 12:26:25 AM »

^ Other than, next week she will be carrying out a couple of engagements with the Sovereign.

She still has 2 of her own remaining to go public, and I think they will be announced after the ^ above engagements; East Anglia's Children's Hospice (EACH) and the Scouts -- I recall she will be or is already in a re-certification course in First-Aid in order to lead and camp-out with the Brownie children in Wales.

Hale · « **Reply #166 on:** February 25, 2012, 01:38:55 AM »

I especially look forward to those engagements with the Queen. As for camping out with the Brownies, I bet she will love that.

Quote from: Wilkat on February 20, 2012, 08:19:38 PM

Just wanted to mention that Clarence House said she has done some behind the scenes work with charities.

I'm not in the least bit surprised.

v_voom · « **Reply #167 on:** March 02, 2012, 01:31:45 PM »

Hi guys,

I have always thought that she was 5'10" tall and many sites have stated so.

However, after having looked at some of the pictures, she seems to be between 5'7' - 5'8" and she is 5'10" only with her heels. I maybe be wrong. Has anyone met her in real life? Even if she is 5'7", as a 5'1" tall I will still be quite envious!

I also googled Pipa Middleton but many sites claime she's 5'9" when most likely she's between 5'5" 5'6"......still quite enviuos though!

iisuzieii · « **Reply #168 on:** March 02, 2012, 01:42:25 PM »

I think she is 5'9. I am curious to know how tall William because everything say 6'3 but wasn't it said that tailor for his wedding uniform made it for him being 6'5.

nymphette · « **Reply #169 on:** March 02, 2012, 02:12:48 PM »

In my opinion after looking at many photos and making comparisons, I would say she is 5'8" to 5'9". I don't think she is as tall as sometimes stated because she tends to usually wear high heels with a platform sole. I wonder if Will's is really 6'3" as they say, I would love to see a photo of him standing next to the Spanish Prince Felipe because he is really tall and I believe his stated height, and it would be interesting to make comparisons. I am 5'1" as well and as such wear high heels whenever I can. I think that Pippa is 5'5" or 5'6" based on comparisons of photos. They are both somewhat difficult as they both have long torsos, so their proportions can sometimes be confusing when you see them next to other females who have the more typical body type and not such long torsos. Interesting topic, being petite myself I would love to be as tall as them and like to try to guess real heights.

RoyalKateDebate · « **Reply #170 on:** March 02, 2012, 02:53:53 PM »

Hey everyone, |I'm new to forums so please be patient. I am a Kate fan and want to know if anyone can point my in the direction of bad personal experiences with Kate. I only ever hear nice comments from ppl who meet her, but want a more rounded view. *** from twitter said she put some names up of people a few years ago, but the search button isnt working for me. If anyone can give me links/ *real* names of ppl who have said neg. things after meeting Kate, id appreciate it!

sara8150 · « **Reply #171 on:** March 02, 2012, 09:49:00 PM »

PW is 6'3 and Catherine is 5'10

its almost same heights and Diana wores flat heels because she wores high heels because of Charles till 1980's and 1990's use high heels little not lots till split and divorces in 1992 and divorces in 1996.PC is 5'10 and Diana is 5'10 same Kate's

im hope will have thread of Royals Height if moderator and admin grant

Wilkat · « **Reply #172 on:** March 02, 2012, 10:27:51 PM »

Quote from: iisuzieii on March 02, 2012, 01:42:25 PM

I think she is 5'9. I am curious to know how tall William because everything say 6'3 but wasn't it said that tailor for his wedding uniform made it for him being 6'5.

Yes, Will is 6' 5" and Kate is 5' 10 1/2 ". It depends on the angle of the camera as to how tall they may appear.

v_voom · « **Reply #173 on:** March 02, 2012, 10:47:58 PM »

Thanks guys!

If Wills is 6'5" then it makes sense that Kate is 5'10". Maybe it's the cameras but when I saw pictures of Michelle Obama and Nicole Kidman with Kate, Michelle was towering over Kate even though Michelle is 1in taller than Kate and so was Nicole. I wish I could upload the pictures but they're on my other laptop!

And nymphette, I'm glad I'm not the only person who try to guess everybody's height! I find that a lot of petite girls do this!

nymphette · « **Reply #174 on:** March 02, 2012, 11:34:33 PM »

I still don't buy that Kate is that tall, but who knows, yes guessing relative heights is one of my pastimes.