Why do the English Royals look so old?

[Anonymous]

Given their largely linear family tree and shallow gene pool, the royals don’t look half bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

+1 she just looks like she's wearing the heaviest makeup.

Harry looks younger to me in pix where you can actually see him (which makes sense bc he is!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

Are you blind? Meghan has zero wrinkles and Kate and William, but especially Kate, look positively haggard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Camilla looks very similar to Jill Biden and they are about the same age (Camilla a few years older).

Also, on Kate—I wonder if she has stomach issues. I know a lot of women who develop stomach issues like IBS or food intolerances in their 30s and end up on restricted diets, cutting dairy or wheat or fats. Most of the very thin middle aged women I know fall into this category—they eat healthy but can’t eat a lot of the yummy foods that keep some padding kn the rest of us or they end up with intestinal distress. The other really thin women I know are distance runners.

A lot of disordered eaters make up sensitivities and allergies, too. I think it is fair to assume Kate is on a very restrictive diet.

Maybe, but now that I’m 50, I am utterly shocked at the number of older white women who get raging diarrhea or gas if they eat what I consider a normal diet. I eat gluten, dairy, sugar, meat, everything and I used o assume all these women were partially anorexic until I saw it happening to friends and family that used to be right with me on the brownie sundae train. I don’t know if it’s a genetic susceptibility on the Northern European gene line or what. I’ve also noticed on the metro a number of women n their 40s who have just horrific gas, and I assume they have the same problem. So now when I see a woman in her 40s/50s that has lost a lot of weight, I tend to think gastro issues, not eating disorder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:English people do not age well (I am English).

Rubbish. I am from downunder where people spend too much time in the strong sun. I remember an elderly English woman at a wedding in Australia who had beautiful skin compared to the locals of the same age. My friends who stayed in Australia look more wrinkled than me as I escaped in my 20s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well they are old. King Charles can hardly walk though -- his legs must be messed up somehow. He looks like Henry VIII on PBS.

Henry VIII was short and fat. Charles may not be super hot, but he's neither of those things...

Henry VIII was about 6'2". Very tall for his era and would still be considered tall today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think there is some truth to the idea that american celebrity is so soaked with plastic surgery and instagram culture etc that it is jarring for us to see regular, unfiltered, unaltered people. And these people have the best tailors in the country making their custom clothes.

I agree. Recently I was wanting to find a source where I could look at pictures of older women with faces that haven’t been affected by cosmetic procedures, just to reacquaint myself with what people normally look like, and I couldn’t even think of where to find that.

Charles and Camilla look they could be Martha Stewart’s parents and she is in her 80’s. Also Nancy Pelosi’s parents and isn’t she like 90?

Nancy Pelosi looks old, just a different kind of old. The plastic surgery is not fooling anyone.

A better, more stylish, not geriatric but still appropriate old. I like Nancy's look.

Her hair and makeup just don’t look believable though. I think they actually age her

Pelosi's boobs are too big. Her upper body is that of a kitchen babushka. She looks lumpy in her clothing which needs better tailoring.

[Anonymous]

The men in the family don't age well - Edward is another example. He was quite attractive in his youth, but the hair loss really aged him.

Agreed was as well about styling - Anne has had unflattering hair for YEARS. I saw pictures of her when she around 40, and she was dressed so matronly - her daughter is around 40 now and still looks great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

+1 she just looks like she's wearing the heaviest makeup.

Harry looks younger to me in pix where you can actually see him (which makes sense bc he is!)

No way, Kate's makeup is quite heavy and not in a good way. I think Kate is beautiful but there is no denying that Meghan has a more youthful look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

Are you blind? Meghan has zero wrinkles and Kate and William, but especially Kate, look positively haggard.

On what planet does Kates appearance make Meghan look younger than 40? She is not snd does not look like a spring chicken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

+1 she just looks like she's wearing the heaviest makeup.

Harry looks younger to me in pix where you can actually see him (which makes sense bc he is!)

No way, Kate's makeup is quite heavy and not in a good way. I think Kate is beautiful but there is no denying that Meghan has a more youthful look.

Maybe for her age but nobody is going to magically think she’s years younger than she actually is. You could say the others look worse but nobody is fooling anyone here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

She's not 20 lbs heavier, just different built. Also their necks look the same - and this is where age shows the most.
I think they are both pretty, with great figures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its amazing how much Americans aren't used to seeing women in photographs or on TV who haven't had tons of work done.

That's not true. They look old AF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its amazing how much Americans aren't used to seeing women in photographs or on TV who haven't had tons of work done.

That's not true. They look old AF.

So do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Meghan is dark skinned and 20 lbs heavier than Kate at least. ThAt makes a huge difference

I always thought she looked much older than Harry. She doesn't look the youngest in that pic in the least. She looks her age.

+1 she just looks like she's wearing the heaviest makeup.

Harry looks younger to me in pix where you can actually see him (which makes sense bc he is!)

Kate is better looking than Meghan. She's just making a weird face in that photo