THE TIMES: Where is Kate? The royal family attracts more speculation by the day

[TallerSally]

On today's front page, the Times' Kate Mansey reports on the contrasting approaches taken by KP and BP's comms teams in their handling of the extraordinary situation the RF's currently in. It kicks off with the current host of the US's Daily Show (formerly hosted by the formidable Jon Stewart) asking some questions:

"While the King hosted friends and met world leaders, the Palace’s reluctance to comment on the Princess of Wales’s condition has created a rising sense of panic
One of America’s most popular TV comedy programmes was asking the question that had captured the nation. It was not about the Super Tuesday primary contests ahead of the US elections, or the State of the Union address, which elicited an exaggerated yawn from the presenter.

Instead, The Daily Show’s Ronny Chieng turned to look straight into the camera to ask: “Where is Kate Middleton? Where are you, Kate?”

There was no rush to provide reassurance this week from the Prince of Wales, who appeared to begin his working week on Friday with a visit to the Oval cricket ground for his Earthshot environmental campaign. Aides said that William had been busy all week, just not in a way that was visible to the public.

The King was doing the opposite. Away from public duties on doctors’ orders while he undergoes cancer treatment, the monarch had been expected to take this week as scheduled time off. Despite being told to “slow down” by the Queen, who took her own advice and flew to sunnier climes for a few days of relaxation, the King was ramping up.

He was photographed meeting world leaders and ambassadors from his living room at Buckingham Palace. Away from the cameras, he hosted friends who rallied round for afternoon tea and dinner dates. He insisted on the “more public” option of travelling between Buckingham Palace and his more comfortable private quarters at Clarence House in the State Bentley, so that he could “be seen”. Quite what the Queen made of it all from her sun lounger is anyone’s guess, but there are those in the palace who have an idea."

A tongue-in-cheek piece, but raises some interesting questions: have KP messed up the comms around Kate? and William? What is really going on with them? Why is the Royal family-funding public kept in the dark for so long, when usually not a couple of days go by without us having some nicely staged photo of some kind from Kensington Palace?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/where-is-kate-prince-william-king-charles-cancer-khktpx9bm

C section is a low incision and far easier to recover from than midline and higher incisions. This is why c-sections are no longer performed from belly button to pubic bone but horizontally. If Kate had bowel surgery, the incision would have been higher up. If she had a hysterectomy at the same time, which someone speculated up thread that she has perhaps had both, these are both major surgeries.

Even if the hysterectomy is performed vaginally, which is the easiest to recover from, it is very tiring with a long recovery time and comprises hundreds of stitches. Mine was the most difficult. I had an 8 inch incision from above my belly button to pubic bone.

I don’t think people appreciate how major a hysterectomy is when comparing to c-section. I didn’t get out of bed for about 48 hours. I took 5 months to really feel strength return.

I don’t think she just had a hysterectomy, or at least only a hysterectomy as she stayed in hospital for 2 weeks. If Kate had bowel surgery, she may have been in a high dependency ward and not out of bed for several days. This is by far the more likely scenario. Or as speculated in this thread, both.

no thanks, I think grown ups should be able to handle it themselves. Its not part off the discussion to tell someone else, not to be pat of the discussion!

Doubt very much it was an ectopic pregnancy. My mum had this in the early 90s (older mother, ruptured tube, huge blood loss etc) and was up and about within a few days, and doing the school run with us (on foot, not in an SUV) after a couple of weeks. Or maybe us commoners tend to be much more resilient with these things because we have to be.

@LadyMuckonpancakes it can change quite quickly. In her first pregnancy she was seen at an engagement and admitted to hospital a couple of days later.

If she's had major abdominal surgery to the point of being hospitalised for three weeks the chances are she doesn't look that great - pale, weak, and probably lost a ton of weight on an already slender frame. My guess is that she doesn't want to be pictured like that so she's taking a few months to build herself back up to her glamourous self.

The point is, do we need the Gloucesters ( whoever they are) to be drafted in for anything? Why cant we just open a leisure centre and say 'Here, a lovely new leisure centre for you'? If people really need some Royals name on a letterhead of a charity before they donate to charity, maybe people need to take a good hard look at themselves. They would do far more good opening up some of those palaces for the public, and generate income to maintain them. Do they pay tax at the rate everyone else does? Because if they did, considering they are billionnaires, then maybe that leisure centre they opened or charity they visited would get more funding.
As someone said above, the personnel has been slimmed down but not the money. How many houses do they have (maintained by us) for this 'slimmed down' Monarchy? The younger Wales kids need to know from childhood that they will not be expected to work for the Royals and should be doing something useful. What a tragic waste of a degree and expensive education that they do nothing of note all their lives but make small talk and generate gossip for the tabloids and, frankly, bread and circuses and photo opps for the government.

So stop telling people not to be part of the discussion then!

Making the point that people are overly invested and/or demanding information to which they are not entitled is part of the discussion, whether you like it or not. People are as entitled to express these views as they are to speculate about where Kate is or what is wrong with her.

I agree that we're all grown ups here, but that means that we should be mature enough to understand and accept that people will have different perspectives and viewpoints, and they are perfectly at liberty to express these.

Telling someone to go and find something else to do instead of engaging in pointless speculation about someone else's private information is not a personal attack. It is simply a way of making a perfectly valid point.

The mind boggles as to how anyone could do that without once stepping outside. Six months of hiding indoors because she's apparently terrified some hapless pap might get a pic of her looking like Cherie Blair after the 1997 election isn't exactly going to put colour in her cheeks or help with her fitness levels.

I think threads like this ought to be pulled.

It's a form of bullying @TallerSally

The person you're discussing can't reply.
But they may get a hint of what is being said from friends or the Palace comms machine.

Is it any different to the intrusion that followed Diana when she was alive?

I honestly can't think what type of surgery the PoW had, neither am I worried where she might be.
It's just - the doctors say, if slender frame as PPs
said, then any surgery is easy to perform!
Respite time surely, however five months?
The Princess is one of the fittest people I have seen. 🤔🙂

She can do the school run, but she can't post on mumsnet? Makes no sense at all.

Oh come on! 🤣

Genuinley don't understand what is so hard for people to understand from the original statement that she'll be resting until Easter? They said it from the start, she had the means to be able to stay out of the public eye and get some proper rest from what would likely be a harrowing operation and recovery given the length. She's not a puppet to be brought out to entertain at public will.

I sincerely hope she's sat on her mum's sofa under a blanket eating heinz tomato soup and cheese on toast. It's not Easter yet, give the woman a break.

Making personal remarks to the OP and telling them to go find something else to do is NOT part of this and is against guidelines and I am not in favour of constant reports, rather reminding people to not do that. MNHQ don't like it when you tell someone they shouldn't be here.

There is plenty of scope for going outside at Amner, where they were at half term.
She’s probably spending time at her parents house too. We don’t know where she is or what she’s doing .
They have a helicopter so no need to travel by road.

The point is, do we need the Gloucesters ( whoever they are) to be drafted in for anything? Why cant we just open a leisure centre and say 'Here, a lovely new leisure centre for you'? If people really need some Royals name on a letterhead of a charity before they donate to charity, maybe people need to take a good hard look at themselves

And I'm sure if that the day ever comes where the public would prefer the head of their local council to open the new hospital wing or whatever, the royals will be happy to hand over the job. As it stands, many people rather like the idea that someone in the RF has taken the time to come to them and mark their local event. They don't need to take a good hard look at themselves at all, they've decided this is what they want. It just happens not to be something you approve of, that's all.

The Gloucesters aren't "drafted in" - they have been doing royal engagements for 5 decades, and loyally supported the late Queen (as did the Kents). It has been well documented that the Duke had to take on royal duties after the early and sudden death of his elder brother, Prince William. The Gloucesters still do hundreds of engagements a year. People really need to read a bit more widely, so that they can inform themselves.

Apparently it's June now. Trooping the Colour.

I don't agree that telling people to go and find something else to do is against the guidelines. It isn't a personal attack and it isn't abusive.

Ultimately, it's for MNHQ to decide, but if you don't want to report it, that's your call. Your failure to report doesn't give you license to start policing the thread yourself though.

Agree. Bet they’re getting divorced.

As someone said above, the personnel has been slimmed down but not the money. How many houses do they have (maintained by us) for this 'slimmed down' Monarchy?

I think this is the reason for the public conversation about her tbh and it didn't help with William not being seen and dropping out of an event. They take so much money now that people really do feel they're owed something more for it. I disagree we are owed her private details but I can see this being an inevitable reaction amongst some of the public because of that.

But you don't object to people being told that expressing an alternative point of view is "making the thread tiresome"?

I think the biggest mistake their PR made was refusing to tell people exactly what Kate had done. Fair enough under privacy concerns but it would have been extremely stupid and naive to assume that people won't start speculating about one of the most famous women on the planet. The entire situation has become a farcical Rohrschach test for whatever people want to believe. Some are convinced she wasn't that seriously ill and just using it skive work, some believe she was in a coma and replaced by a clone, others believe it was pregnancy related and most of Gen Z thinking it's hilarious she had a BBL.

Surely the indignities of those speculations and Photoshopped/AI memes cannot rival whatever embarrassment is involved with just coming out with the real reason. Even if it's bowel related. Big deal. There are tons of stoma influencers on social media who make it their mission to destigmatise the condition. Obviously nobody is expecting to see graphic imagery but simply saying it was a stoma or resection surgery is not a taboo statement.

A good example of how a personal health PR was handled was Angelina Jolie's radical mastectomy and oophrectomy. She realised that as one of the famous women on the planet, she might as well use it as an opportunity to raise awareness because the speculations would never stop if she tried to hide it. The announced her surgery and then she wrote a very touching article in Vogue outlining the reasons behind her decision. This came out very shortly afterwards, before social media speculation or trolling could take place. Then her breast surgeon (female) also had the opportunity to write articles explaining her work. Since it involved reproductive parts, Angelina Jolie could just as easily have insisted on keeping it entirely private.

funny, thats what people are doing by telling the OP of the thread they're on to go away and do something else! So I shall say what I want, because I know it's within guidelines and not personal.