To think the Duchess of Cambridge has no place in sports personality of the year

[Nishky]

Martina Navratilova made a moving speech about female role models so who do they roll out to present it?

Hilli, ha, like beebs care one iota about any of our views

Friends of mine who are not from the UK and so haven't grown up with this sycophancy, saw the BBC coverage of the jubilee and were at the arse-kissing commentary. Luckily I was in Scotland and could tune it all out.

So Flatbread, when you said "why not have someone who is actually working in these areas, give out the awards?", you didn't actually mean that as a question, then? It was just a rhetorical device for saying "I think it would be better if they had someone who is actually working in these areas but I don't think it'll happen?", is that right?

Because it didn't read like a rhetorical question when you asked it. It read like a challenge to me. And I have no skin in this game, whereas you appeared to be passionate.

Eldritch I see every reason to hold the royals up to scrutiny on a personal basis. I believe the personal is important. It's proved so through history. We have many young royals who have achieved very modestly indeed at the moment, with some rare but refreshing examples, such as Zara. Unfortunately for her, Kate chose not to work either for money or charity for ten years so she's at one fairly extreme end of the indolent scale. Which to my mind makes this idiotic hero worship of her even more idiotic than it would otherwise be.

There is a huge difference between hero worship and defending someone who is being actively attacked.

I don't know Kate's personal circumstances or anything about her working, or not working, life. But then I don't know much about anyone's, even friends', I just take them at face value on how nice they seem as people.

Though I would imagine that Zara Phillips' success in horseriding hasn't come about completely independently of her royal connections. I just have no idea about either of them, or anyone else really, in terms of their careers.

Yellowtip I take your point in a sense, because blind hero worship of Royals is certainly not healthy for our society, but really the whole 'Waity Katie' thing just seems so trivial to me.

The trouble with scrutinising on a personal basis is that you have really limited access to the facts needed to make a full judgement. Like trying to judge a court case when you haven't sat through it.

Incidentally, I'm not sure why you think that Zara has achieved so much. She won a medal, yes. But it's for a sport that costs an absolute fortune (horse is 50k+, uniform is 8k+, there's training on top etc etc). Thus the vast majority of the population has no chance of playing it.

I don't get it. It is ok for someone to post how 'brave' and 'hardworking' Kate is, with no evidence to indicate this. Infact, it is plastered over the media. But when someone says no, she comes across as lazy and self-absorbed, people call that 'personal attacks'

I was just on a thread where people were making disparaging remarks regarding Nigella. All of you who were so offended by these 'attacks' on Kate, are going to go and defend 'poor' Nigella now, right?

slhilly that's not true. We have more access to facts than we ever have done at any time in the past. And the more we know, the less salubrious this lot look. Perhaps this cult of celebrity will bring them down, in a nice twist of irony.

Of course I realise Zara's chosen sport is massively exclusive, by it's nature. But she's at the top of that sport nonetheless. And juxtaposed to Waity Katie she's looks vastly superior in every respect. Much more attractive, much cleverer, much harder working etc. Credit where it's due.

Sleds what we're seeing collectively on MN and out on the streets and in the papers and magazines etc. is certainly hero worship of Kate, not mere defence. It's mindless and it's proved dangerous as well.

Exactly Flatbread, that's why it's mindless. I think there's far more empirical evidence to suggest Kate is lazy and self-absorbed than 'brave' and 'hardworking', which is why I believe she is.

Kate deserves a friggin medal for having to sit through hours and hours of bloody sport. It was lovely to see her, and looking so lovely too. Who wants to look at a horse-faced inbred royal anyway?

^I was just on a thread where people were making disparaging remarks regarding Nigella. All of you who were so offended by these 'attacks' on Kate, are going to go and defend 'poor' Nigella now, right?

So if calling Zara Phillips 'thoroughly unpleasant, very rude, demanding and dismissive like her mother' isn't 'rude, uncalled for and downright nasty' LtEve, then what is it? The fact that it's personal opinion is quite irrelevant of course.

Everyone in the army is likely to have interfaced with royals - no big deal there - but the fact that you 'haven't heard' adverse comments about Kate hardly constitutes evidence that she is or isn't thoroughly unpleasant, rude etc. I also doubt that waitress evidence would stand up as compelling character evidence in court, beautiful and heart warming though it is.

Zara has had a massive leg up from both her parents. Not everyone has a famous equestrian for a mother and a trainer for a father, never mind money and land. On the other hand look at Mary King, or even better the Dressage team, where one is from a wealthy background, the other two have done far more to climb their way up (I'm not sure if the Gold medalist owned her horse, or her Mum sold something to buy it and then she trained it up).

However most of this thread has just been nasty bitchiness. So what that Kate hasn't done much (except being brave to come out given how ill she looked under the make-up). At least she didn't get there by taking her clothes off, living in the big brother house or having a dubious relationship with a celebratory. (Her and William's relationship seems relatively "normal".)

Yellowtip, I didn't say we didn't have more facts than in the past. I said we have limited access to the facts required to make a full judgement. I stand by that. I don't mean you can't make a judgement - you clearly are doing so. But I think you're making a misjudgement as there's huge amounts of stuff you don't know, or you think you know but are actually just inferring.

I also struggle to think of the circumstances in which I personally would be comfortable to use pejorative nicknames about a woman in the public eye ("Waity Katie"), who is neither a politician nor a criminal. I think it's an anti-woman thing to do. I don't think it's particularly helpful to do in the case of men, either, but given where women sit in society, I think it's especially not a good thing, and doesn't sit well with a republican / left-leaning political consciousness.

Kate just stood on the stage at the end, pretty much. Though she'd have probably given a better speech than David Beckham who appeared to have forgotten how to read. I didn't have any problem with her being there any more than the Queen going to the FA Cup final.

I think a lot of people having a go at Kate are very jealous and sad. She seems really lovely and was very brave to be there at all, I'd say.

I'm also slightly astounded to see you say this, Yellowtip: "[Zara is m]uch more attractive, much cleverer, much harder working [thank Kate] etc. Credit where it's due."

I don't think attractiveness or intellect are valid criteria for moral judgement, and they're certainly not "achievements". They are descriptions.

Doing good things in the world is a moral achievement. Being hard working is, I guess, a moral achievement of a sort. Although the world would be a better place for many people if they didn't have to work so damned hard. Making use of the assets you're lucky enough to be born with is a moral achievement. But simply having those assets? Being clever or pretty alone? That's not an achievement.

And for the life of me, I don't know what kind of facts you have used to conclude that Zara is cleverer than Kate.

It was a personal experience, when I met Zara Tindall at a completely social event (nothing to do with the military at all) and saw, with my own eyes, the way she behaved, her 'telling off' and her actions afterwards. That is not rude etc, it is a simple statement of fact. I have seen her twice since at similar events, but she didn't come to my attention then - which is why I said she can be thoroughly unpleasent - not that she was

As for Prince William and Kate, I was simply pleased to hear of their reputation and the way they are regarded by some of the people they are in regular contact with. I don't know why that seems to displease you?

Yawn, back to sycophancy. Kate is 'very brave' and people are 'jealous and sad'

Ahem, the only saddos are those that hero-worship the good-for-nothing scroungers.

I notice none of you responded to the point regarding the Olympic ambassadors going on a jolly to France instead of supporting the para-olympics. I guess that must have also been a 'brave' decision in your brain-washed coconuts

We sooooo need a like button on here

I personally would prefer to call the teachers who saved the children in Connecticut, while putting their own life at risk, as 'very brave'

But I guess for some, anything the royals do, whether it is fart or wipe their bum, is worthy of ooh and aaah

I notice none of you responded to the point regarding the Olympic ambassadors going on a jolly to France instead of supporting the para-olympics

Flatbread: You, yourself questioned 'is this true?' I hadnt heard it, so did some googling. All I could find was that they were only programmed to attend 3 days, and that they missed the closing ceremony. I couldn't find any 'outrage' or people upset that they had gone, so there was nothing to comment on. Of course if you can do better, please do.

Oh, and as a matter of interest. How come when people support the royal family you call it 'sycophancy or arse-kissing' but when you are rude about them we are not allowed to call you jealous, bitter or sad?

Yellowtip, I don't know about the 'collective' as you phrase it - I don't read mainstream media very often, and certainly don't follow royal stuff very much.

I was pointing out that some of us are here saying we don't like her being attacked...it doesn't make us royalists or sycophants, but this stereotype seems to fit what you and Flatbread are trying to say, so we're all getting lumped together.

I'm sure there are peoplewho hero worship the lass. That's not my problem, and neither is it my problem if there's a thread slagging off Nigella, which I hadn't seen.

These points aren't really relevant - I think just some people on this thread, right now, are trying to say, there's no need to be horrid about Kate, even if she is a royal and even if we don't necessarily support the monarchy.

Also Flatbread - I don't consider myself, or several of the other posters saying similar, to be 'brainwashed' - but I do consider your saying so pretty rude and pretty narrow minded.

Commenting negatively on what's being said about someone famous is not the same thing as being a sycophantic, brainless idiot. It's really not. You can be both, but you don't have to be.

I also struggle to think of the circumstances in which I personally would be comfortable to use pejorative nicknames about a woman in the public eye ("Waity Katie"), who is neither a politician nor a criminal. I think it's an anti-woman thing to do. I don't think it's particularly helpful to do in the case of men, either, but given where women sit in society, I think it's especially not a good thing, and doesn't sit well with a republican / left-leaning political consciousness

Yes, slhilly, that's it exactly.

No it's typical DM misogynist bullshit. I totally agree.