Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

That's because Meghan possesses a work ethic.

She does seem to have a great work ethic. I hope you're right that both she and Harry will be friendlier with Charles and Camilla.

Charles betrayed his mother. I couldn't fault him if he was polite but didn't want a close relationship.

He's also the future King. I think William made a grave mistake by freezing him out for 10 years and Kate for allowing him too + egging it on (she really doesn't show any amount of respect/concern for Camilla). Charles is already beaming with pride at first being given a prominent role in Harry + Meghan's wedding and then doing a joint role with them and Camilla later that week.

I don't know how Charles will act as King and Camilla as Queen but being lazy is one thing. Being lazy and disrespectful is entirely another.

So what that he's the future king? So is William. Do you think that means they can go around breaking vows, lying to people, generally being disrespectful to the people they're supposed to love the most?

I guess you think the president should be allowed to do whatever he wants as well? And Oprah, because well she's Oprah? And the royals in other countries who are corrupt and siphon all the money that keeps most of their country living in poverty?

Fame, or birthright to a title, doesn't give people the right to behave like a jerk. And when you treat people badly, you can't expect them to be in a hurry to treat you better than they need to in return.

I think Diana was a work horse. I think she really cared about using her fame to make a difference with organizations she cared about. I don't think Kate has that passion. I dont think its a negative or positive on her as a person but there is a clear difference. I think Megan could potentially "up the ante" because she seems maybe more like Diana?? Curious to see how that will play out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

That's because Meghan possesses a work ethic.

She does seem to have a great work ethic. I hope you're right that both she and Harry will be friendlier with Charles and Camilla.

Charles betrayed his mother. I couldn't fault him if he was polite but didn't want a close relationship.

He's also the future King. I think William made a grave mistake by freezing him out for 10 years and Kate for allowing him too + egging it on (she really doesn't show any amount of respect/concern for Camilla). Charles is already beaming with pride at first being given a prominent role in Harry + Meghan's wedding and then doing a joint role with them and Camilla later that week.

I don't know how Charles will act as King and Camilla as Queen but being lazy is one thing. Being lazy and disrespectful is entirely another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

That's because Meghan possesses a work ethic.

She does seem to have a great work ethic. I hope you're right that both she and Harry will be friendlier with Charles and Camilla.

Charles betrayed his mother. I couldn't fault him if he was polite but didn't want a close relationship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

That's because Meghan possesses a work ethic.

She does seem to have a great work ethic. I hope you're right that both she and Harry will be friendlier with Charles and Camilla.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is hilarious. KM has already boosted the monarchy just being herself. She’s fashionable, likable, had 3 adorable kids and seems to have a solid marriage with no scandals. Haven’t you heard of the “Kate effect”? By taking 6 months off she’s following royal tradition...

No, I haven't. Nobody has because she never shows up anywhere.

The Kate Effect is non-existent. She hasn't done much to improve the standing of the monarchy.

+1

When she was young and beautiful, she at least was a good clotheshorse.

Now she is kind of just like a rich SAHM. Only she is a moocher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

That's because Meghan possesses a work ethic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

It's no secret that Will was particularly close with his mom and quite sensitive (and adult beyond his years) to the things that happened back then. Harry has a very different personality and was also younger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is hilarious. KM has already boosted the monarchy just being herself. She’s fashionable, likable, had 3 adorable kids and seems to have a solid marriage with no scandals. Haven’t you heard of the “Kate effect”? By taking 6 months off she’s following royal tradition...

No, I haven't. Nobody has because she never shows up anywhere.

The Kate Effect is non-existent. She hasn't done much to improve the standing of the monarchy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

I'm actually watching Charles and Camilla with this new bride closely. It's been no secret that William & Kate froze mostly Camilla out and by extension Charles. They don't really like doing joint events with them, Charles is rarely seen with one or the other, and the Middletons are always the first to be invited to see the new babies - not the future King of England.

I'm thinking Charles & Camilla see a chance to get in good with Harry & Meghan instead and already waging that campaign. We'll see a lot more pictures of them laughing and working together - pretty much a given at this point.

The official working event 3 days post-wedding was the first.

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is hilarious. KM has already boosted the monarchy just being herself. She’s fashionable, likable, had 3 adorable kids and seems to have a solid marriage with no scandals. Haven’t you heard of the “Kate effect”? By taking 6 months off she’s following royal tradition...

No, I haven't. Nobody has because she never shows up anywhere.

Anonymous wrote:Premise is off. She may not be as active while the kids are young but she DEFINITELY has a lot of obligations that will keep her away from the kids. It just is what it is. She also seems to enjoy going to some of the events without the kids.

She does have obligations that keep her away from her kids (she is rumored to have at least two full-time nannies) but they aren't "work" obligations. Sh just isn't doing a lot of what is traditionally considered royal work. Her obligations are mostly personal and probably benefit her and Will but not the royalty or the country in general.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Not really

It is a great thing for the British monarchy to have a royal mom putting her young children first.

How fortunate they are that Kate has her priorities straight.

Given how the popularity of the monarchy is steadily declining and there is now open conversation about ditching the monarchy in the UK in a way that is unprecedented, I wouldn't say Kate and William have done such great things for the monarchy.

That is because of Charles and Camilla.

The boys and their wives, but especially their wives and kids, are the best thing about the monarchy.

Not enough to turn the trend, though. Not nearly enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. There's nothing wrong with someone (any parent, not just the mom) wanting to be the one to raise their children.

Good for her that she's doing what she wants and feels is best for her kids!

That's fine as long as she's not being subsidized by British taxpayers.

Well what do you think would happen otherwise? You think she would seek out a low-cost home-based daycare and trek her kids over there every day to pay some other mom 20 pounds to look after her kids for the day? While she gets her nails and hair and makeup done and then shows her face at some "royal engagement"?

Show some sense. Royal children cost a lot of money regardless of who is looking after them.

And FWIW I think they should abolish the entire monarchy. I see what Kate is doing as a good example though. Better would be if she didn't have any nannies, but I don't know many UMC women who wouldn't have at least one nanny if they're at home with 3 small children.

Premise is off. She may not be as active while the kids are young but she DEFINITELY has a lot of obligations that will keep her away from the kids. It just is what it is. She also seems to enjoy going to some of the events without the kids.