George going to Marlborough? Article linked.

[Greatballzoffire]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12872215/William-kate-snub-eton-george-marlborough-college-second-visit.html

I give up. You've won. Ordinary is not a disparaging term from me.
If you want to think Kate is more in tune and has a broader experience with ordinary people than the rest of us, that's fine, go right ahead! I can't do this anymore.

I would expect someone who was paid to have a diplomatic role for this country to have interests and experiences. And as for her interest in early years, nothing has come from this in 10 years, apart from her occasionally rehashing one survey for a photo opportunity. Her job is to talk to representatives from other coutries yet when faced with partners of other world leaders she is not in any way accomplished. She is 41 years old hand has not done anything of note.

Early years development my Aunt Fanny. They all pick a 'cause'. Camilla has gone for domestic violence along with Sophie Wessex, William is elephants I think and a sprinkling of MH and Kate has gone for an exceptionally soft option. What a lot of rubbish.

I find Kate's interest in Early Years kind of ironic in a country that abolished Sure Start....

“Nobody is ordinary in my book. We are all human and unique.”

I doubt very much that the poster was being rude to ordinary people.
the fact is Kate and the royal family only meet who they want to. Yes they do the occasional walk about, but that is just to meet people who are their fans.
I class myself as ordinary. Kate would have no idea about my life , or others like me,

The fact she isn’t doing anything but her work as a Royal and mum is very savvy. She’d be argued with and every nuance picked over especially if she had a job ( can you even imagine the fuss over her expenses or taxes or role or what she wears).
Don’t blame her. Keep your head down. She’s definitely not stupid.

This has gone a little strange. Kate doesn’t know hat a normal life is, as an adult. She had a normal childhood and boom left home for University and met William. Never really worked, prioritised her relationship (her choice with presume her parents support), married him. She has now lived at least on the side of that world longer than she was normal.

But how this hpcan be used against her I don’t see. Early years is a huge thing unless you want to look at all the damage which is done to children, and therefore society, in those early years. Especially the first year of life.

It all reminds me of the Miss America pageant.

If we stopped allowing this pointless family to spend so much money on their various ludicrous events and multiple properties then there might be a bit more money over to re-instate Sure Start or institute an alternative programme.

Perhaps Kate should channel her inner Barbie and step into the real world permanently rather than popping out very occasionally to justify her tax payer funded existence saying early years are really, really important. She has said nothing of any real interest, nothing which will engage the target audience or impact their lives, certainly nothing which was actually making a dent, such as Sure Start.

I don't think chasing William for ten years at her mother's behest can excuse the limp way she approaches her pet cause or her apparent wholesale vacuity.

maybe she really loves him and was willing to wait.
I might think she and W are work shy and don't live in the real world. but im not keen on the waity Katie stuff.
yes they both need to step up and do something.

Early years is a huge thing unless you want to look at all the damage which is done to children, and therefore society, in those early years. Especially the first year of life.

Early years is hugely important, which is why its far too important to have Kate sitting there having photo opportunities with little kids and giving the opportunity to politicians to sit there like nodding dogs when they have no intention of funding early years initiatives. Kate comes out with PR platitudes like' we need to nurture our children by doing all this free stuff like take them outside and spend all our time with them'. It lets the government off the hook spectacularly. Well that's all well and good but what about parents who are functionally illiterate so are too embarrassed to take their children to the library, or libraries closing due to funding cuts to local authorities even though the single most important thing you can do in early childhood is read to children and get them to learn to read, or parents who don't know how to cook and can't afford to experiment with food choices that their kids won't eat? Or parents with drug and alcohol problems? Or parents who, if they dont both work will not be able to afford to keep a roof over their head? 'Take the children out to the park' won't help the children who really need the help. She Is talking to people of her social group who don't want to pay more tax to fund proper support in one place ( like surestart) because if only poor people nurtured their children more then all society's ills would be solved for free. She doesn't know anything about childhood development. Her own sister did a Masters in child development, with 3 much younger children while she does nothing for days on end. She loves sports. Why isn't her pet project something to do with girls sport? The early years thing sounds like something some courtier came up with to let her have loads of pictures with toddlers. Another example of the problems with someone who spent her formative adult years doing nothing. She just does what she is told because she seems to have no mind of her own.

Well, we now know, courtesy of Harry's latest court case, just how far the press were targeting the royal girlfriends of the day. If they were putting trackers on cars used by Chelsey, I bet they were doing just as much to Kate. It must have been relentless.

Chelsey was outside UK for much of her time with Harry, and the time she was here she was at university. She didn't have a job here until after the relationship had ended.

So we don't really know what lengths the press would go to to infiltrate the girlfriends' working lives - if either of them had worked, would the press have planted people in their workplaces? Would there have been attempts at stings? Would they have been able to have had anything like a normal working life?

We don't know why Kate left her first job (nor whether intrusion played a role). We do know that she then went to work at a place where the workforce could be trusted (possibly even vetted). And no-one knows whether she was working just as diligently as the other employees (often assumed she couldn't have been)

I found an interview with the Founder of Jigsaw who briefly discusses Catherine working with them.
She definitely mentions press intrusion as being an issue - "tv crews parked at the bottom of the drive".
I remember paparazzi photos of her taken while she was on the bus going to work.
I can't imagine it being an easy workplace for anyone tbh.
https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/kates-not-precious-she-mucked-in-at-jigsaw-6922185.html

The delivery doesn't negate any of the three points: Mum evidently had eyes on the prize, Kate Middleton is unenergetic and ineffective in relation to early years support and she just does what she is told because she seems to have no mind of her own (pinching those words from another poster).

There is no point in trying to have a sensible conversation, based on evidence, when some like @goodbyestranger has such a fixed and extreme opinion.

It seems to be an article of faith to them, it is all about belief not evidence.

A bit worrying when someone has such fixed views about someone they have never met (let alone the belief that George was 'clearly' marked for Eton)

My views are entirely evidence based, without exclusion.

Apologies that those views fail to coincide with yours wildernesssw.

@wildernesssw people are allowed to have differing opinions. just because you don't agree with them doesn't make them wrong.

Really goodbye have you sat on a board with her, have you co operated with her on projects , been a co trustee , worked in her household ? How much real evidence as opposed to gossip and hearsay.

cyclamenqueen I have not sat on a board which included Kate Middleton, no. Nor had anything to do with any pet project of hers, nor been a trustee of a trust where Kate Middleton was also a trustee. (I have been on boards and been a trustee, just not with Kate Middleton). Moreover I wouldn't work in any royal household for all the tea in China: are you aware of the legislation the rf has wriggled out of in relation to employment rights? They are very much not employers I would tolerate. Frankly I think I might have an attitude problem which wouldn't go down too well, so I think refusing a hypothetical job offered by any of them would be doing both sides a decided favour.

But in relation to evidence for my views, I only bother with evidence which has some weight. That depends on all sorts of things obviously, including type, source etc. All the usual stuff one needs to quantify to see how much credibility evidence has. Some hearsay is actually very compelling, which is why there are so many exceptions to the general hearsay rule in English courts. The same actually goes for 'gossip'. Not all gossip is unreliable. It depends how many people are in the chain and who they are. You have to make judgment calls.

In all fairness @goodbyestranger, when you talk about a school being in a child's best interests, I don't see Prince George or any of his siblings entering the mainstream workforce any time soon.

Or ever.

I think Prince George's requirements are so unique that pretty much any school would do, as there will undoubtedly be hours upon hours of training behind the scenes as to how to greet a foreign royal, what questions to ask, what questions not to ask, and how to look interested at all times.

I remember reading about an interview with Princess Anne where she said something along the lines of she and Charles not being actively trained as such, but they learned what to do by observing their parents.
I think that is one of the reasons that we are seeing William and Catherine's children present more often at important events.

Obviously I don't know what I'm talking about, but I think the world and in particular the media has changed a lot since Charles and Anne were young in the 1950s. I am not suggesting that George and his siblings are being hothoused in public relations now, but I think it would be remiss of the Royal family not to prepare them as they become teenagers. Literally everything they say in public will be reported, scrutinised and criticised.

Do we really want another Prince Harry or Prince Andrew?

Do not compare the alleged rapist Prince Andrew with Prince Harry who has committed no such criminal acts.

Please don't tell me what to do.

My comment was simply that these are two public relations scenarios that I imagine the Royal family would prefer not to be repeated.

But more importantly, please don't tell me what to do.