why do people care if Kate Middleton wants to be a SAHM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In 1985 when William was 4 and Harry was one, Charles and Diana did over 500 combined events.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/2506110/prince-charles-did-double-his-sons-work-30yrs-ago-as-wills-and-kate-are-slammed-for-shirking-royal-duties/amp/

Way, way more than William and Kate.

That is not a ringing endorsement given how that family unit turned out. Maybe things will turn out better for this generation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 1985 when William was 4 and Harry was one, Charles and Diana did over 500 combined events.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/2506110/prince-charles-did-double-his-sons-work-30yrs-ago-as-wills-and-kate-are-slammed-for-shirking-royal-duties/amp/

Way, way more than William and Kate.

And the Queen's children were mostly raised by nannies while she traveled the world carrying out royal duties. Times are changing, parenting
practices are different now. Three of Elizabeth's children are divorced. William may just be prioritizing a happier family life for himself.

1. Will and Kate also have at least one nanny (nanny Maria) and a full household staff. Additionally, George and Charlotte go to preschool
2. You are assuming that Kate is spending her time not working taking care of her children but you have no idea what she is doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of you are taking the criticism of Kate oddly personally. This isn't about her being a SAHM. It's about the fact that the popularity of the monarchy in the UK is steadily declining, and if you separate out generations in the UK, it has sharply declined.

Justified or not, there is an increasing current of criticism of Kate in the UK that is growing at the same time as general dissatisfaction with the monarchy. Once the baby boomers pass on in the UK, who knows what the general perception will be, because it is the older generation that is keeping the status quo now anyhow. The perception of Kate as entitled, as taking advantage of the British public is tied to the fact there is growing dissatisfaction with the monarchy anyhow. I am sure Elizabeth, who has always had a good sense of what the population sees, knows this too, hence the rumors of her confrontation with William. I think this is also why the Queen was so open to Meghan.

This has nothing to do with those of you being so weirdly defensive in this thread unless you too have married into British royalty.

Links to these supposed "rumors"? You are completely fabricating a scenario that is entirely in your head. You seem a tad overly invested in the royal family. Why is that?

DP. Republicanism has a very long history in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom

That said, I actually think that William could take a lot of the attention off Kate by working more especially considering he is the actual heir.

I know what Republicanism is. I was asking for specific links to the PP's assertion that the Queen has "confronted" William. This is just totally made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 1985 when William was 4 and Harry was one, Charles and Diana did over 500 combined events.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/2506110/prince-charles-did-double-his-sons-work-30yrs-ago-as-wills-and-kate-are-slammed-for-shirking-royal-duties/amp/

Way, way more than William and Kate.

And having been the child in that scenario, William wants different for his own kids. More power to him, I say.

+1
And Prince Charles made it clear that he was a very lonely boy at school when his parents didn't even have time to come visit him. Even when he was sick. I'm sure that he's very proud of William for making different life choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of you are taking the criticism of Kate oddly personally. This isn't about her being a SAHM. It's about the fact that the popularity of the monarchy in the UK is steadily declining, and if you separate out generations in the UK, it has sharply declined.

Justified or not, there is an increasing current of criticism of Kate in the UK that is growing at the same time as general dissatisfaction with the monarchy. Once the baby boomers pass on in the UK, who knows what the general perception will be, because it is the older generation that is keeping the status quo now anyhow. The perception of Kate as entitled, as taking advantage of the British public is tied to the fact there is growing dissatisfaction with the monarchy anyhow. I am sure Elizabeth, who has always had a good sense of what the population sees, knows this too, hence the rumors of her confrontation with William. I think this is also why the Queen was so open to Meghan.

This has nothing to do with those of you being so weirdly defensive in this thread unless you too have married into British royalty.

Links to these supposed "rumors"? You are completely fabricating a scenario that is entirely in your head. You seem a tad overly invested in the royal family. Why is that?

DP. Republicanism has a very long history in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom

That said, I actually think that William could take a lot of the attention off Kate by working more especially considering he is the actual heir.

I know what Republicanism is. I was asking for specific links to the PP's assertion that the Queen has "confronted" William. This is just totally made up.

There was a link posted about it a few pages back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She accomplished nothing in life on her own from the time she entered college. It's as if her sole purpose of being was to marry Will. They called her Waity Katy for a reason. She waited for 7 or 8 years for Will, and during that time, she took off work. She didn't "do" charity work. All she did was party and shop during those years. She is typical of a lot of upper class Millennials.

She took a gamble, and she won.

If you're the young woman reproducing the heirs to the throne, why do anything else? She probably feels that she's getting the rewards in life from just being a starfish and breeding. That is a job in and of itself.

I find these threads entertaining so I read them. The above is hilarious. I live and work in DC. I work with a lot of wonderful, exceptionally smart, and successful women BUT I am also friends, with and live around, a lot of women who either worked only briefly and then married well and know others who waited for their man a long time as well. It’s NORMAL! I k ow nothing about Kate but she seems quite lovely to me in that she appears warm to others when in public, seems to genuinely love her husband and now children.

She met a guy in college, fell in love, and is now a wife and Mom. Why does it have to be more than that. And, ok, if what other posters say she went after him - so what. Clearly would not have been successful if he did not feel the same. If I remember from dating, everyone finds someone they are interested in and tries to get their attention, strike up a meeting, hope they date. That’s how it works.

I wish only happiness for all of them. Beautiful young family.

Yes, yes, and yes. Great post. I was watching a PBS program about Kate the other night and was almost brought to tears just watching their sweet family interactions. And also, some of the flashback scenes of Diana and her boys. Such warm, wonderful moms. I'm really glad to see the kids being put first and think they set a great example for younger couples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of you are taking the criticism of Kate oddly personally. This isn't about her being a SAHM. It's about the fact that the popularity of the monarchy in the UK is steadily declining, and if you separate out generations in the UK, it has sharply declined.

Justified or not, there is an increasing current of criticism of Kate in the UK that is growing at the same time as general dissatisfaction with the monarchy. Once the baby boomers pass on in the UK, who knows what the general perception will be, because it is the older generation that is keeping the status quo now anyhow. The perception of Kate as entitled, as taking advantage of the British public is tied to the fact there is growing dissatisfaction with the monarchy anyhow. I am sure Elizabeth, who has always had a good sense of what the population sees, knows this too, hence the rumors of her confrontation with William. I think this is also why the Queen was so open to Meghan.

This has nothing to do with those of you being so weirdly defensive in this thread unless you too have married into British royalty.

Links to these supposed "rumors"? You are completely fabricating a scenario that is entirely in your head. You seem a tad overly invested in the royal family. Why is that?

DP. Republicanism has a very long history in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom

That said, I actually think that William could take a lot of the attention off Kate by working more especially considering he is the actual heir.

I know what Republicanism is. I was asking for specific links to the PP's assertion that the Queen has "confronted" William. This is just totally made up.

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/entertainment/people/queen-prince-william-argument-546822

https://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/news-opinion/prince-william-kate-just-wont-7769305

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/654363/royal-family-feud-queen-elizabeth-II-Prince-William-Kate-Middleton-pregnant-public-duties

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

Yes, we will see. Just as we've seen what great young men William and Harry are. They've attributed their characters many times to the way their mother raised them. I have no doubt William and Kate are raising their own kids in a similar fashion, so more power to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

Yes, we will see. Just as we've seen what great young men William and Harry are. They've attributed their characters many times to the way their mother raised them. I have no doubt William and Kate are raising their own kids in a similar fashion, so more power to them.

You mean the fashion of having a work ethic? Doing 500 events in one year? Setting an example?

William and Harry are well-known for being the kind, charismatic, somewhat dutiful men they are because the examples set for them by Diana and Charles (both hard workers and empathetic people who cared for more than just ordering clothes and shoes) was clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

Yes, we will see. Just as we've seen what great young men William and Harry are. They've attributed their characters many times to the way their mother raised them. I have no doubt William and Kate are raising their own kids in a similar fashion, so more power to them.

Huh. My impression of Harry and Will has not been that so great. You think dressing up like a Nazi is good behavior? You have low standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of you are taking the criticism of Kate oddly personally. This isn't about her being a SAHM. It's about the fact that the popularity of the monarchy in the UK is steadily declining, and if you separate out generations in the UK, it has sharply declined.

Justified or not, there is an increasing current of criticism of Kate in the UK that is growing at the same time as general dissatisfaction with the monarchy. Once the baby boomers pass on in the UK, who knows what the general perception will be, because it is the older generation that is keeping the status quo now anyhow. The perception of Kate as entitled, as taking advantage of the British public is tied to the fact there is growing dissatisfaction with the monarchy anyhow. I am sure Elizabeth, who has always had a good sense of what the population sees, knows this too, hence the rumors of her confrontation with William. I think this is also why the Queen was so open to Meghan.

This has nothing to do with those of you being so weirdly defensive in this thread unless you too have married into British royalty.

Links to these supposed "rumors"? You are completely fabricating a scenario that is entirely in your head. You seem a tad overly invested in the royal family. Why is that?

DP. Republicanism has a very long history in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom

That said, I actually think that William could take a lot of the attention off Kate by working more especially considering he is the actual heir.

I know what Republicanism is. I was asking for specific links to the PP's assertion that the Queen has "confronted" William. This is just totally made up.

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/entertainment/people/queen-prince-william-argument-546822

https://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/news-opinion/prince-william-kate-just-wont-7769305

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/654363/royal-family-feud-queen-elizabeth-II-Prince-William-Kate-Middleton-pregnant-public-duties

Ah, some really serious sources there! At any rate - if any of that is true - good for William and Kate for telling the Queen they want Kate to have less formal obligations while she's raising their small children. I don't blame them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

Yes, we will see. Just as we've seen what great young men William and Harry are. They've attributed their characters many times to the way their mother raised them. I have no doubt William and Kate are raising their own kids in a similar fashion, so more power to them.

Huh. My impression of Harry and Will has not been that so great. You think dressing up like a Nazi is good behavior? You have low standards.

You've never done anything stupid in your college years/youth? I certainly have. I've done things that I've later been mortified about and deeply regretted. I would say for someone who lost his beloved mother at a very impressionable age, and then suffered terrible depression, he's done a remarkable job of growing into a fine man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the Queen was a new queen and young mother, we did not know as much as we do now about child development, and the formative years and bonding and attachment parenting, etc.

Maybe there's a lack of closeness with George or Charlotte that she attributes to not being there as much in the early months? Who knows. I don't think we're personally affected by how much she does or doesn't work.

She was also the reigning monarch. There's an enormous difference between being the reigning monarch, and being the person married to the second person in line to be the reigning monarch. Kate has much more freedom to make these choices than Elizabeth did when he third child was born.

My guess is that Kate enjoyed her time with George and Charlotte when they were young, and sees an opportunity with the world focused on Meghan to get a little more of that time.

I worked full time when my kid was young because I didn't have a choice. I didn't see any lack of closeness with my kid, but I loved being with him, and if I'd had the opportunity to work less and have more time with him, while still drawing the same salary, I'd have grabbed it. I don't see why it's surprising that Kate is doing the same thing.

This has been explained multiple times. I doubt anyone begrudges her a couple months of parental leave. It's that she does the bare minimum (if that) when she's not on maternity leave.

And you care because....??? Oh, right. Because you can't do the same thing and it just kills you when other can (and do).

DP who has posted about how there is a perception that Kate and Will are benefitting off the British public. My kids are now older and I was a SAHM by choice and a WOHM by choice for part of it. Unlike a lot of posters in this thread, I can acknowledge a public conversation that is happening about public figures without getting into a panicked tizzy that this somehow is a reflection on my own life.

I also have no idea how any of you know Kate is such an amazing mother. Don't you know anything about media management? What you see is carefully cultivated. We will see how their kids act on their own in 15-20 years. Until then, we only have a carefully crafted public image to work with.

Yes, we will see. Just as we've seen what great young men William and Harry are. They've attributed their characters many times to the way their mother raised them. I have no doubt William and Kate are raising their own kids in a similar fashion, so more power to them.

You mean the fashion of having a work ethic? Doing 500 events in one year? Setting an example?

William and Harry are well-known for being the kind, charismatic, somewhat dutiful men they are because the examples set for them by Diana and Charles (both hard workers and empathetic people who cared for more than just ordering clothes and shoes) was clear.

It's not clear why you hate Kate Middleton so very much, but it's very clear you have extremely odd reasons for doing so. She's a mother of three small children, who obviously takes great pleasure in raising them - just as Diana did. Just because she doesn't have as many engagements as you would like at this moment in time, doesn't mean that she won't in the future, when her children are older. And she still does plenty of appearances and engagements. I think she's admired because she is *also* kind, charismatic, and empathetic - AND puts her family first. She's a good role model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 1985 when William was 4 and Harry was one, Charles and Diana did over 500 combined events.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/2506110/prince-charles-did-double-his-sons-work-30yrs-ago-as-wills-and-kate-are-slammed-for-shirking-royal-duties/amp/

Way, way more than William and Kate.

And the Queen's children were mostly raised by nannies while she traveled the world carrying out royal duties. Times are changing, parenting
practices are different now. Three of Elizabeth's children are divorced. William may just be prioritizing a happier family life for himself.

1. Will and Kate also have at least one nanny (nanny Maria) and a full household staff. Additionally, George and Charlotte go to preschool
2. You are assuming that Kate is spending her time not working taking care of her children but you have no idea what she is doing.

Neither do you! Why are you assuming the worst about her, instead of the best?