Kate Middleton looks really happy lately

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if will and Kate are living together or not but if they aren’t, I don’t think any less of them. I’ve been with my husband for almost 30 years and if we had multiple houses we would definitely benefit from being able to spend some more time apart. Through most of human history men and women did not spend so much time together. It works for some couples but many couples would be happier with more separate spheres. I think Victoria and Albert were the first British royals to share a bedroom and it was considered weird. If they are somewhat unhappy with each other, it speaks well of them that they are not airing that dirty laundry in public and creating drama all around. Generally, I think Kate is doing a very good job at her job. The only real miss I can think of is the trip to the Caribbean where they both seem totally unprepared. And possibly she should have done a better job smoothing over the Megan drama, but I think it’s really hard to say exactly what went down there.

I do judge them for living apart since they have young kids AND because a huge part of their public persona is selling them both as these loving and doting parents. So if Kate is in the country with the kids and her parents, and William is at Kensington on his own (and especially if the affair rumors are true), then yes, I do judge that. Because in that case he is effectively abandoning his kids, plus the whole set up would be incredibly hypocritical given the image they work VERY hard to portray to the public. Like you can't live in separate houses and see your kids a few times a month, and then release family photos portraying your family as very close knit and loving, and have me think highly of you.

I would have very different comments about a private family, but these are people supported by the state, living off money that originated from taxing commoners and stealing from colonies, and who argue that their existence should continue because they are a steadying, family-centric, moral and ethical influence on the populace. You cannot make that argument while living separately, excepting one parent from any parenting duties, and especially not if William really is sleeping around. Nope. You want to do that? Give your land and money back to the people and go be private citizens somewhere.

We get it. You're a partisan with a chip on your shoulders so you can't be unbiased and realistic. Nothing they do will ever satisfy you, you'll just come up with another made up excuse to disapprove.

[Anonymous]

I’m laughing at the idea that the BRF has ever justified its existence by some purported “moral and ethical influence.” That’s like using Hollywood as your moral and ethical influence. I don’t think the British people are that stupid. I don’t really know why the Brits like having a royal family but I would not in a million years think it was because they look to them for moral and ethical guidance.
There are lots of couples that get along better with more time apart. If Kate and William are among them, then I applaud them for figuring that out and coming up with an arrangement that works for them. Charles and Diana apparently could not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if will and Kate are living together or not but if they aren’t, I don’t think any less of them. I’ve been with my husband for almost 30 years and if we had multiple houses we would definitely benefit from being able to spend some more time apart. Through most of human history men and women did not spend so much time together. It works for some couples but many couples would be happier with more separate spheres. I think Victoria and Albert were the first British royals to share a bedroom and it was considered weird. If they are somewhat unhappy with each other, it speaks well of them that they are not airing that dirty laundry in public and creating drama all around. Generally, I think Kate is doing a very good job at her job. The only real miss I can think of is the trip to the Caribbean where they both seem totally unprepared. And possibly she should have done a better job smoothing over the Megan drama, but I think it’s really hard to say exactly what went down there.

I do judge them for living apart since they have young kids AND because a huge part of their public persona is selling them both as these loving and doting parents. So if Kate is in the country with the kids and her parents, and William is at Kensington on his own (and especially if the affair rumors are true), then yes, I do judge that. Because in that case he is effectively abandoning his kids, plus the whole set up would be incredibly hypocritical given the image they work VERY hard to portray to the public. Like you can't live in separate houses and see your kids a few times a month, and then release family photos portraying your family as very close knit and loving, and have me think highly of you.

I would have very different comments about a private family, but these are people supported by the state, living off money that originated from taxing commoners and stealing from colonies, and who argue that their existence should continue because they are a steadying, family-centric, moral and ethical influence on the populace. You cannot make that argument while living separately, excepting one parent from any parenting duties, and especially not if William really is sleeping around. Nope. You want to do that? Give your land and money back to the people and go be private citizens somewhere.

This reads like fan fic. Or, anti-fan fic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if will and Kate are living together or not but if they aren’t, I don’t think any less of them. I’ve been with my husband for almost 30 years and if we had multiple houses we would definitely benefit from being able to spend some more time apart. Through most of human history men and women did not spend so much time together. It works for some couples but many couples would be happier with more separate spheres. I think Victoria and Albert were the first British royals to share a bedroom and it was considered weird. If they are somewhat unhappy with each other, it speaks well of them that they are not airing that dirty laundry in public and creating drama all around. Generally, I think Kate is doing a very good job at her job. The only real miss I can think of is the trip to the Caribbean where they both seem totally unprepared. And possibly she should have done a better job smoothing over the Megan drama, but I think it’s really hard to say exactly what went down there.

I do judge them for living apart since they have young kids AND because a huge part of their public persona is selling them both as these loving and doting parents. So if Kate is in the country with the kids and her parents, and William is at Kensington on his own (and especially if the affair rumors are true), then yes, I do judge that. Because in that case he is effectively abandoning his kids, plus the whole set up would be incredibly hypocritical given the image they work VERY hard to portray to the public. Like you can't live in separate houses and see your kids a few times a month, and then release family photos portraying your family as very close knit and loving, and have me think highly of you.

I would have very different comments about a private family, but these are people supported by the state, living off money that originated from taxing commoners and stealing from colonies, and who argue that their existence should continue because they are a steadying, family-centric, moral and ethical influence on the populace. You cannot make that argument while living separately, excepting one parent from any parenting duties, and especially not if William really is sleeping around. Nope. You want to do that? Give your land and money back to the people and go be private citizens somewhere.

Sorr of. You've get about half of it. It's like the story of the blind men describing the elephant. Bits and pieces.

Oh, do enlighten us, wise one

They live off the interest from the Sovereign Grant, which is their money. Some "ill gotten", depending upon your definition. And they are figureheads, the embodiment of British culture. Not morals or ethics, as you tried to ascribe. Steadying, yes. Perfect beings? Nope.

The sovereign grant is just a piece of the bigger picture. There’s also the dutchy money which profits from rents paid by British citizens among other things, and security costs that also hit taxpayers (those full figures are never disclosed). Charles has “slimmed down” the working royal force, but the sovereign grant increased. So fewer people are reaping the bigger reward. Jus’ sayin. I’m an American, so it’s not my money going to this tourist trap, so i can enjoy their spectacle from afar.



*duchy

[Anonymous]

Prince Charles said to Diana:
Did you really think I would be the first Prince of Wales to not have a mistress

Diana said she kissed a Prince and got a frog

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m laughing at the idea that the BRF has ever justified its existence by some purported “moral and ethical influence.” That’s like using Hollywood as your moral and ethical influence. I don’t think the British people are that stupid. I don’t really know why the Brits like having a royal family but I would not in a million years think it was because they look to them for moral and ethical guidance.
There are lots of couples that get along better with more time apart. If Kate and William are among them, then I applaud them for figuring that out and coming up with an arrangement that works for them. Charles and Diana apparently could not.

In the 20th century when other European countries were eliminating are significantly sidelining their royal families, the British absolutely did talk about how their royals represented British values of duty, loyalty, and family. The reins of both George VI and Elizabeth II were viewed in this light, and the royal family took on the embodiment of WWII-era British culture.

One reason the Charles/Diana divorce was such a massive deal was that it undermined this narrative. Sure, royal heirs have had mistresses for centuries. But it’s not the Middle Ages anymore and the UK is now a representative democracy. “Why does the British royal family exist?” is a perennial question in British culture and media, and it dogs the royals themselves even if they’d never show it. Most of BRF PR, from the deals with the press to their social media campaigns to major events like the coronation, are designed with an effort to justify the family in mind.

There are a not insignificant number of people who do not believe the BRF would survive another Charles/Diana level implosion. There are more anti-royalist in England than there were under the last monarch. Charles and especially Camilla are far less loved even by die hard royalists.

If you don’t think the BRF is keenly aware of the importance of William and Kate projecting a happy, health, devoted family, you’re nuts. If you think there would be no backlash to the revelation that they live separately, he’s having an affair, and they no longer even like each other, you’re doubly nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prince Charles said to Diana:
Did you really think I would be the first Prince of Wales to not have a mistress

Diana said she kissed a Prince and got a frog

She was very naive about the situation, poor thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m laughing at the idea that the BRF has ever justified its existence by some purported “moral and ethical influence.” That’s like using Hollywood as your moral and ethical influence. I don’t think the British people are that stupid. I don’t really know why the Brits like having a royal family but I would not in a million years think it was because they look to them for moral and ethical guidance.
There are lots of couples that get along better with more time apart. If Kate and William are among them, then I applaud them for figuring that out and coming up with an arrangement that works for them. Charles and Diana apparently could not.

In the 20th century when other European countries were eliminating are significantly sidelining their royal families, the British absolutely did talk about how their royals represented British values of duty, loyalty, and family. The reins of both George VI and Elizabeth II were viewed in this light, and the royal family took on the embodiment of WWII-era British culture.

One reason the Charles/Diana divorce was such a massive deal was that it undermined this narrative. Sure, royal heirs have had mistresses for centuries. But it’s not the Middle Ages anymore and the UK is now a representative democracy. “Why does the British royal family exist?” is a perennial question in British culture and media, and it dogs the royals themselves even if they’d never show it. Most of BRF PR, from the deals with the press to their social media campaigns to major events like the coronation, are designed with an effort to justify the family in mind.

There are a not insignificant number of people who do not believe the BRF would survive another Charles/Diana level implosion. There are more anti-royalist in England than there were under the last monarch. Charles and especially Camilla are far less loved even by die hard royalists.

If you don’t think the BRF is keenly aware of the importance of William and Kate projecting a happy, health, devoted family, you’re nuts. If you think there would be no backlash to the revelation that they live separately, he’s having an affair, and they no longer even like each other, you’re doubly nuts.

The monarchy persists because it is the default. Replacing the monarchy with a republic isn't as simple as snapping your fingers. It'd require massive political change, which is why no political party is touching the subject. Brexit was enormously bitter and divisive and a pandora's box, and no one is going near another even more damaging plebiscite. The percentage of "republicans" is still small, most people range from indifferent to enthusiastic supporters. But the monarchy does do a more than decent job as an apolitical figurehead for the British state. In fact, it does a very good job and there is a virtue to the opening of hospitals and recognizing accomplishment by an apolitical entity rather than the partisan reality of political office holders.

The monarchy is conscious of public appearance re privilege and wealth and I'd have to say have handled it well. The BRF has been remarkably good at adapting and evolving, today's monarchy isn't Victoria's monarchy, and her monarchy wasn't the monarchy of George V and Mary. Charles is clearly setting the monarchy into yet a different direction, and one that is more attuned to the times.

[Anonymous]

Is Brexit expected to harm tourism? I Know it's bad for the economy.
IN that case, I wonder if Brexit helped the monarchy -- because people think it attracts money to the country

[Anonymous]

Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

Zero. Also no proof they live apart. Just a whisper campaign amplified by the rabid Sussex supporters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

Zero. Also no proof they live apart. Just a whisper campaign amplified by the rabid Sussex supporters.

Speaking of rabid fandoms, Meghan and Harry took their kids to watch a 4th of July parade and Meghan haters are still dissecting it a week later. Yikes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

Zero. Also no proof they live apart. Just a whisper campaign amplified by the rabid Sussex supporters.

Speaking of rabid fandoms, Meghan and Harry took their kids to watch a 4th of July parade and Meghan haters are still dissecting it a week later. Yikes!

People on both sides are quite weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

Zero. Also no proof they live apart. Just a whisper campaign amplified by the rabid Sussex supporters.

Speaking of rabid fandoms, Meghan and Harry took their kids to watch a 4th of July parade and Meghan haters are still dissecting it a week later. Yikes!

People on both sides are quite weird.

True, but I find the Meghan haters weirder because I a neither for or against any of these people (I just find them entertaining as a concept, but don't hate them or love them), but if I say anything even remotely critical about Kate (even like "I'm not sure about that headpiece") I get assumes of bing a "rabid Susses supporter." But if I criticize Meghan for wearing wrinkled shorts, no one tells me I must hate Kate and everything she stand for. There's definitely a lot more craziness on one side than the other, though I do think using either of these women as some kind of parasocial avatar is weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been actual proof of William cheating?

Zero. Also no proof they live apart. Just a whisper campaign amplified by the rabid Sussex supporters.

Speaking of rabid fandoms, Meghan and Harry took their kids to watch a 4th of July parade and Meghan haters are still dissecting it a week later. Yikes!

People on both sides are quite weird.

True, but I find the Meghan haters weirder because I a neither for or against any of these people (I just find them entertaining as a concept, but don't hate them or love them), but if I say anything even remotely critical about Kate (even like "I'm not sure about that headpiece") I get assumes of bing a "rabid Susses supporter." But if I criticize Meghan for wearing wrinkled shorts, no one tells me I must hate Kate and everything she stand for. There's definitely a lot more craziness on one side than the other, though I do think using either of these women as some kind of parasocial avatar is weird.

Uh, no. If you criticize Meghan's shorts you get reported for being a virulent racist. Not the same at all. No criticism is allowed.