The sudden unusual turn on Princess Kate

[Whatt]

Today, I wanted to share something thought-provoking that has caught my attention recently - a noticeable change in the way the media portrays Kate Middleton.

Some publications that previously showed favor towards Kate (DM cough, cough) have started publishing stories that present her in a more critical light. It's an interesting shift.

Firstly, there's a story circulating about an encounter between Kate and a convicted murderer at a charity event. Additionally, there's talk of the taxpayer potentially providing support for her family's struggling business. This raises questions about the circumstances surrounding their business venture and the implications it may have for public funds.

What's intriguing is the parallel being drawn between Kate's current media treatment and the scrutiny faced by Meghan Markle in the past. It's worth discussing whether there's a connection or simply a coincidence.

Furthermore, there's some buzz on Twitter suggesting that Kate may have unintentionally upstaged the King during the Chelsea Flower Show. While it may seem like harmless gossip, it's interesting to consider the impact of such events on the monarchy's reputation. Some even speculate that Camilla might have been involved in the leak of these stories, adding an extra layer to the intrigue.

Taking a step back, it's worth pondering whether the monarchy should be concerned about being upstaged in this day and age. Are we witnessing a shift in priorities and expectations?

Yes I agree with this ^^ and I’m
a Republican!

Kate doesn’t strike me as a slacker tbh from the way she is handling her role now. She always seems on top of the job, immaculately turned out, and well, - professional - if you can apply that adjective to being a royal!

I know she has a lot of help but that comes with it’s own pressures as anyone knows who has workmen in their home. It all needs managing in other words. Not as restful as you might imagine always having people around.

Thanks Roussette.

I bet I can top that: I worked for a family business run by 2nd/3rd generation nepo babies. About 100 employees and everyone was either related or F-ing. So many pairs of spouses were also working there (for some reason they gave preference to someone’s spouse for any job). I made the worst decision of my ENTIRE LIFE and got my ex boyfriend a job there so we could live together. He then proceeded to have an affair with another woman in the same office. I literally had the desk between them. The person he had an affair with was friends with another woman in the same office who was the girlfriend of the CEO’s son. I then got bullied by her but nobody would do anything because she was F-ing the boss’s son. Absolute nightmare. Would never recommend it.

Plenty of people with connections do in certain industries, yes. That's one of the reasons why a lot of 'desirable' and hard to get jobs in entertainment and the arts etc go to people who's parents and families are well connected (read: more often than not wealthy too). It seems like the arrangement was beneficial to Jigsaw too, and the co-founder has said many times Kate was a hard worker who treated everyone well, so not sure why some are so annoyed by it really.

https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/royals/kate-middleton-asked-for-a-part-time-job-due-to-her-relationship-with-this-very-high-profile-man-a4466731.html

But so are lots of rich, upper class girls. If you don’t have to work for a living, you can take a little hobby job while you find yourself a wealthy husband.

How hard did Camilla’s daughter Laura Lopes work after graduation, for example? (I have nothing against her at all, just using her as a handy example of somebody in the same circles but not married to a royal).

Also, in her job at Jigsaw Kate was working part time, as she had other commitments in her life that weren’t terribly compatible with a full time job. That probably was more unusual then, but isn’t now. I have worked with colleagues who have been part time because of caring responsibilities, because they also had commitments with charitable organisations, because they were athletes that needed additional income while they trained, and also because they just didn’t want to work full time! It’s not something I have viewed judgementally.

One of my good friends is married to a diplomat. She’s never been able to develop a career since leaving university because she’s never in one place for long enough and, when posted overseas, is seldom qualified to work there in any event. Life happens sometimes, and people make life choices accordingly.

You win.

The place I was at was about 70 employees, day-to-day control of the second generation, first generation still coming in in his 80s with old fashioned attitudes (although he at least had the kudos of having built the thing). Third generation just coming out of uni, clueless, being given senior jobs. There was only one direction of travel...

@Serenster I still get a lot of judgment for working compressed hours (I do 37h but over 4 days instead of 5 😵) because I’m a single mum and nursery is too expensive. I get called lazy, part-timer, “it’s alright for some” and everything else you’ve seen on this thread! It is definitely becoming more normal now though. I have colleagues who do 4 normal days and take 80% salary too. I feel bad for all the royal women because the situations are engineered for them to “fail” however I also think a lot of it is about shaming women’s choices in general by shaming royal women.

Yeah exactly … no one questions in detail how productive Prince Edward has been over his life do they?

Well quite. There are also plenty of people (usually women) who have to find suitable work around their partners job (which essentially Williams role is)- do people harp on about military wives being lazy? How often do people on here also go on about paid employment not being the totality of someone's contributions to the family? Whatever she did would be wrong to some, absolutely the scrutiny is intensified as she's a woman.

You get called lazy? That’s nuts! Please step far away from these idiots!

I'm not even an avid follower of the royals and the main things I know about Edward is that he flunked out of military life and then his whole failed foray into the tv world. So I do feel like how productive/unproductive he's been does get discussed.

She also gets very negatively compared to the Queen who was expected to leave her toddlers behind with nannies for months on end, and who was dragged out of her deathbed to shake the hand of the Tories’ latest offering (like a cat gifting her a dead mouse) and people think that’s a desirable state of affairs. Ironically Diana and Charles now get criticised for going on the tours but taking their babies with them. Women can’t win!

Well, it is funny to watch people fall over themselves making excuses for Kate and blaming the press for preventing her from being able to attempt a proper career, because Meghan is currently getting slated and picked at across multiple threads for not being more successful since leaving the family and nobody seems to be giving any acknowledgement to the press making it difficult ( impossible ) for her! Posters are laughing at every tiny little thing they can and delighting at any perceived failings while Kate gets excuse after excuse. Just another example of Meghan being held to a much higher standard than any other royal. I wonder what is so different about Meghan.....

Yes you can bet that if Kate were visibly away from her children more she'd be slated as a terrible mother.

Another reason for her not to ramp up her duties immediately on marriage - she would've had to scale them back as soon as the first baby came along.

Oh and I completely agree that the criticism of Meghan in this sphere is nuts - not many actresses are as successful as she was (something her detractors loathe to admit).

Yes he was definitely criticised for it at the time but I don’t hear anyone calling him idle nowadays, whereas Kate is criticised all the time many years on! It’s plain old-fashioned misogyny in my view!

Maybe you need to scroll back further through the thread because Meghan is one of the women we are discussing having her career made impossible by the media who then gloat about her failure, just like Kate and Sophie.

If you’re saying that only Meghan had her career before marriage held back by the media and not Kate or anyone else, then you’re the one holding people to different standards.

The difference is that Meghan set up paparazzi photos of herself and Harry while dating. Refused all assistance from the Queen then claimed none was offered. Complained openly that no one asked how she was doing. Released a letter to her father via her friends then sued when he released the rest. Claimed her passport was kept from her while traveling freely transcontinental. Announced with Harry that she was carving her own path. Accepted freebies from numerous companies. Lied about their involvement with Finding Freedom. Bullied her own staff. Publicly mocked Kate’s bullying by the press on Oprah. Implied the Royal family was racist based on a comment she didn’t even hear.
Responded publicly to the Queen “everyone can live a life of service. Filmed herself in the palace and recorded private interactions for later use.

The differences are endless.

Not all of us! I think Meghan has genuinely done very well for herself - I think she has been grossly maligned by the British tabloids - and I admire her for having grafted for a living, far more than those who get opportunities handed to them on a plate.

I also happen to think that Kate has done well with the opportunities she has been given although she had an easier time of it growing up.

I don’t like the way the press and some sm pit the women against one another either.

And this.

Kate gets on with her duties, even when the press or social media are cruel and spreading hateful rumours (and taking great joy in doing so) she carries on. She doesn't address them, doesn't spread lies and hatred about others, and doesn't make money off of bad mouthing others. People criticising career decisions she made/was forced into decades ago is beyond pathetic and sad and quite different really.

I made the point earlier but it was a few pages ago so maybe you didn’t see, but the other thing is that Meghan was quite a bit older when she started dating Prince Harry so she’d had time to grow her CV and she also came after peak paparazzi time. After her, it’s probably Sophie next who I think was in her late 20s when she started dating Edward and in her 30s when they married, so again she’d had time out of the public eye to develop a career. Compare to Kate who was a university student when she started dating William - anyone who has been a graduate can relate to how hard getting a foot in the door anywhere is, and on top of that she had location to think of as well as paparazzi chasing her everywhere she went. She was ‘lucky’ in the sense she had William and the Middletons to fall back on so part-time work with a reference from a friend wasn’t going to put her on the streets, but we can’t know if that’s what she would have wanted in an ideal world. I think they all got the same treatment, the difference being it’s a lot easier to destroy a career that hasn’t started yet than one that is already well-established. So the difference is not in what the press were trying to do but in how successful they were.

I think you can also compare the treatment Beatrice and Eugenie got in their early 20s, being portrayed as daft little girls (despite being 2 of the most educated members of the family), with pretend jobs (what else could they have gotten with all of that kind of attention), taking too many holidays (the same number as all of the men who are literally in the photos with them). Compare their treatment to eg Peter Phillips.

So a woman should be quiet and dutiful? Otherwise we bash her endlessly? If you think Kate hasn't had staff stir the pot for her, you are very naive. As several reporters have said not the record, their sources are people working for the royals.

@tigger2022 I did not say no other woman has had her work or career affected by the press, no. Its juts certain posters will excuse Kates lack of career while criticising Megan's current situation. If you're not doing that, I am not referring to you. We all know there have been multiple threads doing that here so lets not pretend it isn't happening.

In my opinion it’s not useful comparing Kate and Meghan at all since their situations are so different. It’s more concerning to wonder why Meghan gets criticised so much more than Harry given that they are in the same situation, except e.g. with Spotify she was the one who actually delivered a product.